• 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.

Election too close to call as of Nov 4

Arbo said:
Well, let's wait to hear from AdamT on that one, should be funny whatever dodge he uses.

We can revisit the Redskins after the election.
Click to expand...

It's not out of the realm to question another person's methods. It happens all the time, Arbo. That's why Nate Silver's methods had been criticized or qualified by some, and then that later was amplified by conservatives wanting Romney to win.
 
Fiddytree said:
It's not out of the realm to question another person's methods. It happens all the time, Arbo. That's why Nate Silver's methods had been criticized or qualified by some, and then that later was amplified by conservatives wanting Romney to win.
Click to expand...


The point is he wanted 'other' sources that have been accurate at least in 04 and 08. The CU one fits that bill. So I await seeing him dodge around and work to dismiss one that does not align with his bias.
 
I think the margins will be wider than the polls' margins of error one way or the other. The answer to the question "how could they be wrong" will be simple--independents/swing voters were so overpolled/robocalled, they avoided being polled altogether by early October.
 
Fisher said:
I think the margins will be wider than the polls' margins of error one way or the other. The answer to the question "how could they be wrong" will be simple--independents/swing voters were so overpolled/robocalled, they avoided being polled altogether by early October.
Click to expand...

I let my kids give random answers to the polling calls. I don't think they answered any of them the same.
 
Arbo said:
Who gives a crap what the EC outcome is? What matters is who wins... anything else is just extra nonsense...
Click to expand...

You should care if you're trying to perform an honest evaluation of a predictors skill. Any dingbat on the street could have predicted that Obama was going to win in '08. OTOH, it takes some real skill to call 537 of the 538 electoral votes, and rather amazing skill to call 1075 out of 1076.
 
AdamT said:
You should care if you're trying to perform an honest evaluation of a predictors skill. Any dingbat on the street could have predicted that Obama was going to win in '08. OTOH, it takes some real skill to call 537 of the 538 electoral votes, and rather amazing skill to call 1075 out of 1076.
Click to expand...

Again, the EC count doesn't matter. Tell us about the CU study and why it is wrong.
 
I'll just risk everything and go at this monster like a madman who just lost his four brothers, sister, mother, father, uncle, niece, nephew, brother in-law, beloved wife, 12 children, and his duck.........Romney wins in a landslide! :2razz: :mrgreen:
 
Arbo said:
Again, the EC count doesn't matter. Tell us about the CU study and why it is wrong.
Click to expand...

Not to be too particural, but the EC count is what determines the winner. :doh
 
Arbo said:
Again, the EC count doesn't matter. Tell us about the CU study and why it is wrong.
Click to expand...

It's wrong because it ignores the polling data. I think it's a reasonable method to consider early in the election cycle, before there's actual polling data sufficient to make a reasonable prediction, but once there are hundreds of polls it's just silly to ignore them in favor of a far less rational analysis.

Predicting the last eight winners is not that big a deal, frankly. Six of the elections were easy calls. Polls taken at this point in the election cycle also called the last eight winners.
 
the polls are so all over the place...one poll does it this way another does it that way....2008 was a sure bet Obama would win because he had no record (well except for voting present on everything)and made all the promises from the CENTER that everyone wanted to hear....then he became POTUS....today he has a record......and its not a great one to say the least.....he does not have the charisma he had in 2008....just look from 2008 to today on the amount of people showing up to listen to him speak....He was Hail to Obama back then...today he is just Obama....

the race is to close to call for anyone in here....Except for dreaming and hoping.....If Obama wins I will change my way of living to deal with what he will be bringing...or not bringing...if Romney wins....the way I prepare will be different...my business depends on Romney winning. This race as far as we can see is to close to call....we wont really know till the fat lady sings...and no I have nothing against fat ladies that you :mrgreen:

It will be really interesting to see what the OS do when and if he looses....I will turn MSNBC to watch the melt down(if he looses) or the Hail Obamas from them if he wins.....

cant wait till Tuesday...I hope they can call it that night and we don't have to wait...either way I want to know that night.
 
AdamT said:
Not to be too particural, but the EC count is what determines the winner. :doh
Click to expand...

Yes, one must get to a certain number. That's all that matters. What those numbers are does not matter, and figuring out what the 'count' will be is merely superficial. But glad to see you keep on that O train...
 
Arbo said:
Yes, one must get to a certain number. That's all that matters. What those numbers are does not matter, and figuring out what the 'count' will be is merely superficial. But glad to see you keep on that O train...
Click to expand...

No, it's not superficial. It gives a pretty good indication that someone really knows what he's talking about versus just guessing right on a 50/50 coin flip. Your Redskins example is a perfect illustration of the fact that it's possible to pick winners by pure happenstance.
 
AdamT said:
No, it's not superficial. It gives a pretty good indication that someone really knows what he's talking about versus just guessing right on a 50/50 coin flip. Your Redskins example is a perfect illustration of the fact that it's possible to pick winners by pure happenstance.
Click to expand...

The world is a mysterious place, many things can not be explained. But by all means, keep up with all the superficial analysis and silly 'odds' stuff.
 
Arbo said:
The world is a mysterious place, many things can not be explained. But by all means, keep up with all the superficial analysis and silly 'odds' stuff.
Click to expand...

adam does not realize that vegas bookies set up odds to only they win, take either side of the bet and you lose, the bookies win. thats the game.
 
Bobcat said:
remember that you said this on wednesday, that crow will have a very nasty taste as you eat it.
Click to expand...

What crow? It is impossible to get to 300 electoral votes by 8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom