• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Landslide coming on tuesday

Khayembii Communique said:
There is absolutely no way Romney will win. Sorry conservatives, it just won't happen.
Click to expand...

You're probably right. Democrats should just stay home. No point in wasting their time going out to vote.
 
jdxprs said:
liberals put WAY too much faith in silver. he did pretty well in 2008, but lets face it, 2008 was a very easy year to predict. Nate should stick to baseball.
Click to expand...

As I've mentioned before, it's not just Silver. Every single polling analyst who has studied the data has Obama way out in front.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
There is absolutely no way Romney will win. Sorry conservatives, it just won't happen.
Click to expand...



I don't think there are that many independent Americans who are just driven to commit socialist suicide.



Even if the Democrats win the election, they lose the country...



That's the fundemental problem with the Cloward-Piven Strategy in the end its nothing more than a sucide pact.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
As I've mentioned before, it's not just Silver. Every single polling analyst who has studied the data has Obama way out in front.
Click to expand...

that is absolutely not true. Just talking about polling organizations, almost all have things tied, and that is only with turnout models that EXCEED the advantage democrats held in 2008. The final CNN poll has it tied with democrats at +11. In that same poll, independents go to romney BY 24 POINTS!!!

There is NO WAY obama wins if romney takes indies by 24 points.
 
jdxprs said:
that is absolutely not true. Just talking about polling organizations, almost all have things tied, and that is only with turnout models that EXCEED the advantage democrats held in 2008. The final CNN poll has it tied with democrats at +11. In that same poll, independents go to romney BY 24 POINTS!!!

There is NO WAY obama wins if romney takes indies by 24 points.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about analysts who consider ALL the polls.

Princeton Election Consortium — A first draft of electoral history
ElectoralVote
VOTAMATIC | Forecasts and Polling Analysis for the 2012 Presidential Election
Talking Points Memo
Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

And by the way....

Mitt Romney's lead among independent voters shows signs of dipping just before Election Day.

The combined results of six national polls show likely independent voters shifting toward President Barack Obama by more than 5 points over the past two weeks. In polls conducted by those firms between Oct. 29 and Nov. 4, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney led among independents by an average of 1.5 points, compared to 7 points between Oct. 22 and Oct. 29.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
I'm talking about analysts who consider ALL the polls.

Princeton Election Consortium — A first draft of electoral history
ElectoralVote
VOTAMATIC | Forecasts and Polling Analysis for the 2012 Presidential Election
Talking Points Memo
Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups
Click to expand...

ok, i understand what you mean now. BUT, do you honestly think the turnout models in those polls that those studies are based on are correct??? I can't see any possibility of obama exceeding the +7 democrat turnout rate of 2008 in this election. I think the turnout will be very even, and i think the 18-29 year old turnout will go back to the normal 14%. If that happens, Obama loses big. Many of those polls are depending on a democrat +9,10, and even 11. Do you think they are correct?
 
jdxprs said:
ok, i understand what you mean now. BUT, do you honestly think the turnout models in those polls that those studies are based on are correct??? I can't see any possibility of obama exceeding the +7 democrat turnout rate of 2008 in this election. I think the turnout will be very even, and i think the 18-29 year old turnout will go back to the normal 14%. If that happens, Obama loses big. Many of those polls are depending on a democrat +9,10, and even 11. Do you think they are correct?
Click to expand...

electoralvote is fairly accurate (with a bit of pro-democratic skew) if the last 2 elections are an example, not sure about the rest.
 
jdxprs said:
ok, i understand what you mean now. BUT, do you honestly think the turnout models in those polls that those studies are based on are correct??? I can't see any possibility of obama exceeding the +7 democrat turnout rate of 2008 in this election. I think the turnout will be very even, and i think the 18-29 year old turnout will go back to the normal 14%. If that happens, Obama loses big. Many of those polls are depending on a democrat +9,10, and even 11. Do you think they are correct?
Click to expand...

The aggregator sites aren't using turnout models at all in some cases, and in other cases they don't play a major role. I think they are right. I think there's a 90+% chance Obama is going to win.
 
roflpublican said:
electoralvote is fairly accurate (with a bit of pro-democratic skew) if the last 2 elections are an example, not sure about the rest.
Click to expand...

The Princeton site has been stunningly accurate. They picked the '04 election to the exact electoral vote and they missed '08 by a single electoral vote. They give Obama a better-than-98% chance of winning.
 
AdamT said:
The Princeton site has been stunningly accurate. They picked the '04 election to the exact electoral vote and they missed '08 by a single electoral vote. They give Obama a better-than-98% chance of winning.
Click to expand...

but those odds are based on the polls right?
 
AdamT said:
You're assuming you know how Silver did his calculation. I'll give the benefit of the doubt to Silver on that one. In fact, if you roll over his interactive map you'll see that he does consider both districts separately ... and concludes that there's a high probability that Obama will win both.

As far as judging pollster accuracy, I'm looking at their actual results rather than the identity of the people who are paying to have the polls taken. The house effect is determined by comparing a pollster's results to the mean result of all the polls. You'll be surprised to know that both PPP (supposedly pro Democrat) and Fox (supposedly pro Republican) have been among the most neutral polling firms during this cycle. Simon Jackman: House Effects, Back By Popular Demand

You're meme about undecided voters breaking for the challenger is also incorrect. Silver examined presidential elections going back as far as decent polling data would take him and found no statistical support for that rule of thumb.

Romney has a chance to win. It's just not a very good chance.
Click to expand...

LMFAO... oh, you'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that, ey...

Where did he get his information from?

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/10/...f-obama-in-maines-2nd-congressional-district/
Poll: Romney leads Obama in Maine congressional district - POLITICO.com
Poll Watch: Maine 2nd Congressional District 2012 Presidential Survey | Race 4 2012
Poll: Obama leads Romney in 50% to 47% in Maine-2 - Conservative News

3 polls have Romney up by 5 pts... 1 poll, a PPP (D) poll has Obama up 3pts, but said Romney was up 2pts in early voting (a traditional Democrat strong point), that 1 poll was released after Nate Silver made his predictions...

ITS HIS JOB TO KNOW THESE THINGS...

He either didn't, and it's a major fault for not doing it, or he did it and chose to disregard it intentionally...

Yet, your buddy Nate Silver is without flaw...


My meme? I have a meme? Sweet... Oh, wait... I don't...

How's this little bit treat ya?

2012 election: why Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight.com might be wrong and Romney might be doing better than Silver thinks - PointOfLaw Forum
horn | October 26, 2012 3:20 PM | Reply

Nate already did the correct analysis - you have to use elections with actual *Incumbents* and not 'Party in Power.' This eliminates 2000, 2008, 1988. You get 8 elections.

According to Nate's link above, the net gain in the polls from October is +4.8% for the Challenger, only +1.6% for the POTUS.

That's a 75% break to the Challenger!

Using Nov polls, you get 1.9 for Challenger and 1.1 for POTUS.
So, if race is 50-47 next week, you're likely to see a 51.9-48.1% final in favor of Romney.


So, even according to Nate Silver's analysis, Romney will get a .8 bump...

So if Obama has a .2 lead on RCP, the .8 bump creates a Romney popular vote win...

There is no information on how that effects the swing states...


And there are conflicting reports on how this goes down...
Incumbent Rule

That details that it occurs 80% of the time, but doesn't detail the break...

So, it's up to the voters now...
 
roflpublican said:
everything looks about 50-50 tied to me.
Click to expand...

Then you're not paying attention because Romney would have to pull a massive upset to get enough votes in the EC to win, which won't happen.

The only reason people think it's close is because the media is reporting on close polling of the popular vote to maintain ratings. There is no such close race in the EC.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Then you're not paying attention because Romney would have to pull a massive upset to get enough votes in the EC to win, which won't happen.

The only reason people think it's close is because the media is reporting on close polling of the popular vote to maintain ratings. There is no such close race in the EC.
Click to expand...

Dems always look to have the easier path to 270 because of CA and NY. If you look at the way polls are being done, to make obama look like he is close, and you look at early voting totals so far, Romney clearly has paths to 270. 30,000 people showed up to see Romney just outside of philly two days ago. He hadn't even been campaigning there!!! Republicans are FIRED UP, democrats just haven't noticed.
 
Yep, Romney landslide. My county is the most democratic in SC. At the polling booth there were tons of working class/middle class/older people all talking about how they are pissed at Obama, and his hate for this country. Sorry liberals, Romney is going to win a landslide, I just feel it.
 
jdxprs said:
Dems always look to have the easier path to 270 because of CA and NY. If you look at the way polls are being done, to make obama look like he is close, and you look at early voting totals so far, Romney clearly has paths to 270. 30,000 people showed up to see Romney just outside of philly two days ago. He hadn't even been campaigning there!!! Republicans are FIRED UP, democrats just haven't noticed.
Click to expand...

This will be Chick Fil-A 2.0, we are silent, so nobody thinks we exist.
 
Obama will win in a squeaker. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom