Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Omnibus GOP Primary ThreadFollow

#327 Jan 10 2012 at 7:18 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Allegory wrote:
gbaji wrote:
It's not about statistics though. That's where you're going wrong here. It's about a change from one point in time to another. If something changes from state1 to state2 and you want to know why, you look at what happened between when it was at state1 to when it changed to state2.

But you don't look at how it changed from state 3, 4, 5, or any others right?


Not if the question I'm asking is "Why did it change from state1 to state2". No. Why would I?

Quote:
You're trying to make the word "low" mean "lower." 2008 had a lower GOP turnout than 2004, not a low turnout. One is a comparison between a singular other instance and the is a generalization.


And yet, when you couple the word "low" with the word "relatively", in the context I was using it, most people should be able to noodle out that the turnout was low "relative to the previous election". At the risk of repeating myself, had I used the word "historically", you'd have a point. But I didn't.

Quote:
If I told you my girlfriend was tall at 4'2", I don't point to a midget standing next to her and say "see, she's tall." When I say tall you expect I'm comparing her to a typical female.


Um... But if you were asking why your girlfriends head hit an overhang while the midget next to her didn't, and someone said she was "relatively tall", wouldn't the reasonable assumption be that she's tall relative to the midget and that this is why she hit her head?


It would be quite strange for you to instead assume that the other person was speaking in terms of average heights of people overall, since that has nothing at all to do with the discussion at hand. And even more strange to continue to argue that this must have been what the other person meant, even though it makes no sense at all and he's continually explained to you what he was talking about. And then even more more strange to attempt to argue that the other person is wrong somehow in his assessment as to why your girlfriend hit her head because you insist on clinging to a completely absurd interpretation of what he said rather than the very reasonable and logical one that makes perfect sense.


Quote:
Compared to a typical GOP presidential race they had a high turnout in 2008.


And compared to a typical passenger car, 5 quarts of oil would be plenty to run in my engine. Sadly, that would leave my car about 3.8 quarts low and probably cause massive damage. Do you see how comparing to "typical" cases is often not very useful?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#328 Jan 10 2012 at 8:30 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Oh. And at the risk of putting this thread back on topic:

Remember like 6 months ago when I said that GOP voters were actually quite happy with Romney, already saw him as an acceptable candidate they could get behind, and that we should not interpret the ups and downs of polling in the rest of the field as an "anyone but Romney" but as "let's see if anyone else stacks up", and that barring a really stellar performance by another candidate come primary time folks would drop the other candidates and support Romney? Shocking, I know.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#329 Jan 10 2012 at 9:07 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,731 posts
You predicted that the GOP top choice was the GOP top choice. Congratulations on claiming to predict what everyone knew.

Well, everyone except that one conspiracy theorist and varus.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#330 Jan 10 2012 at 9:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'm sure Romney will be the nominee but, even now, he gets no better than 30% nationally in GOP polling. Given that there aren't any other candidates to "test", I wouldn't consider that great support but more a sense of resignation.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#331 Jan 10 2012 at 9:47 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
You predicted that the GOP top choice was the GOP top choice. Congratulations on claiming to predict what everyone knew.


A 20/20 hindsight version of "everyone" which apparently did not include the numerous pundits insisting at the time that the up and down of a succession of other GOP candidates in the polls indicated an "anyone but Romney" attitude by GOP voters. I said (many months ago), that it really indicated a comfort by GOP voters with Romney, but a willingness to look at the rest of the field "just in case". I believe I even used phrases like "safe bet", "known quantity", and "keeping him in their back pocket".
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#332 Jan 10 2012 at 9:48 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'm sure Romney will be the nominee but, even now, he gets no better than 30% nationally in GOP polling. Given that there aren't any other candidates to "test", I wouldn't consider that great support but more a sense of resignation.


I disagree. Let's see where he polls nationally among likely GOP voters in 2 weeks.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#333 Jan 10 2012 at 9:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Repressed Memories
******
20,911 posts
gbaji wrote:
And yet, when you couple the word "low" with the word "relatively", in the context I was using it, most people should be able to noodle out that the turnout was low "relative to the previous election".

You're the only one who seemed to think this. Even so, if this is honestly what you meant then sure you're right, and I have to apologize for two things. First I'd apologize for calling you incorrect. Second I'd apologize for thinking you were saying something meaningful.

Yes they lost the election because they got less votes than that time they won the election. Relative to an extreme, everything else will be less.

So I guess I nailed it before.
Allegory wrote:
By "low GOP turnout" did you mean they lost the election? If that's all you meant, then yeah I guess losing an election is a major factor in losing an election.

#334 Jan 10 2012 at 9:58 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm sure Romney will be the nominee but, even now, he gets no better than 30% nationally in GOP polling. Given that there aren't any other candidates to "test", I wouldn't consider that great support but more a sense of resignation.
I disagree. Let's see where he polls nationally among likely GOP voters in 2 weeks.

You mean after more people drop out and narrow the field? Good plan.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#335 Jan 10 2012 at 10:02 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,731 posts
I bet he polls really well against the other GOP nominees in September.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#336 Jan 11 2012 at 8:34 AM Rating: Good
******
49,731 posts
Dixville Notch, New Hampshire goes with two for Huntsman and two for Romney, one for Gingrich, one for Paul, and three for Obama.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#337 Jan 11 2012 at 8:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Haha... I was listening to someone on the radio a few days ago (Michael Medved?) say it was "possible" that Madam Secretary Clinton could take 20% of the NH ballot with write-ins and this would show just how weak Obama was! Sadly, this doesn't seem to have been the case.

Also:
Political Wire wrote:
GOP Turnout Underwhelming

First Read: "Here is something that might start to concern Republicans: For the second-straight contest, GOP turnout was pretty pedestrian, especially given the party's supposed enthusiasm about defeating Obama in November. With 95% of precincts in, turnout in last night's Republican primary in New Hampshire was slightly under 240,000, which is about the same as it was it was in 2000 and 2008. While turnout will increase once the other 5% comes in -- setting a record just like it did in Iowa -- it won't be a WOW figure like we saw on the Democratic side in '08."


Edited, Jan 11th 2012 8:51am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#338 Jan 11 2012 at 1:02 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,228 posts
This.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#339 Jan 11 2012 at 2:59 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm sure Romney will be the nominee but, even now, he gets no better than 30% nationally in GOP polling. Given that there aren't any other candidates to "test", I wouldn't consider that great support but more a sense of resignation.
I disagree. Let's see where he polls nationally among likely GOP voters in 2 weeks.

You mean after more people drop out and narrow the field? Good plan.


And? Aren't you're doing the same thing in reverse when making a big deal about Romney only getting 30% when there are 5 (likely 6 when most of those polls were taken) other candidates in the race?

What amazes me is pundits last night (all across the cable spectrum) were *still* trying to make the "Romney just doesn't click with conservatives" argument. What does it take for them to realize that this isn't true no matter how many times they say it? The guy's only the first GOP non-incumbent to win both Iowa and New Hampshire ever. I just find it funny that the pundits keep saying this while the voters appear to be doing the exact opposite.


This is the strongest conservative support behind a GOP candidate this early in the race (who wasn't an incumbent) ever. I suppose it's possible someone else could charge up a head of steam, but odds are this primary race will be pretty much locked up by February sometime.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#340 Jan 11 2012 at 3:10 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,296 posts
gbaji wrote:
What amazes me is pundits last night (all across the cable spectrum) were *still* trying to make the "Romney just doesn't click with conservatives" argument.
I thought you didn't get your news from anywhere.Smiley: dubious
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Last week, I saw a guy with an eyepatch and a gold monocle and pointed him out to Flea as one of the most awesome things I've seen, ever. If I had an eyepatch and a gold monocle, I'd always dress up as Mr. Peanut but with a hook hand and a parrot.
#341 Jan 11 2012 at 3:10 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,731 posts
gbaji wrote:
I suppose it's possible someone else could charge up a head of steam, but odds are this primary race will be pretty much locked up by February sometime.
It was locked up since before Trump threw his weird hairdo into the ring and subsequently withdrew it. The only people that seem to be surprised at this point seem to be people who's jobs involve getting ratings.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#342 Jan 11 2012 at 3:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
And? Aren't you're doing the same thing in reverse when making a big deal about Romney only getting 30% when there are 5 (likely 6 when most of those polls were taken) other candidates in the race?

Nope. That shows that, when given options, most people would rather not pick Romney. How you spin that into being equivalent to people picking Romney when most of their options are gone is... well, I know WHY you said it. I'm just amused that you believe it.

Your argument was that people really support Romney, they just wanted to test the other candidates... just to see what's out there. They've seen what's out there, every candidate has been in the spotlight now and Romney still gets a ceiling of 30% GOP support in national polling. And, no, Ms. Bachmann wasn't included in the latest polls.

I'm sure Romney will win the nomination. I'd worry more about his support following that.
Quote:
The guy's only the first GOP non-incumbent to win both Iowa and New Hampshire ever.

Tied Iowa. Possibly lost due to miscounts but, as I explained before, it's academic given the delegate distribution.

Edited, Jan 11th 2012 3:35pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#343 Jan 11 2012 at 3:59 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,917 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
And? Aren't you're doing the same thing in reverse when making a big deal about Romney only getting 30% when there are 5 (likely 6 when most of those polls were taken) other candidates in the race?

Nope. That shows that, when given options, most people would rather not pick Romney.


No. It shows that when you present people with multiple options in a poll, they'll tend to spread their picks out. This is true in pretty much any poll on any topic. In Jan of 2008, want to know where Obama was polling in a race with only three contestants? Pretty close to where Romney is in a race with twice as many. I'd say a consistent 30% support in this race this early is pretty darn strong.

Quote:
How you spin that into being equivalent to people picking Romney when most of their options are gone is... well, I know WHY you said it. I'm just amused that you believe it.


How many candidates do you think will drop out in the next two weeks Joph?

Quote:
Your argument was that people really support Romney, they just wanted to test the other candidates... just to see what's out there. They've seen what's out there, every candidate has been in the spotlight now and Romney still gets a ceiling of 30% GOP support in national polling. And, no, Ms. Bachmann wasn't included in the latest polls.


And? We're one week into the primaries Joph. You honestly don't realize that many voters wait to see how candidates do in those early primaries before firming up their support? That's kinda bizarre because it's the core reason *why* those early primaries are considered to be so important.

Quote:
I'm sure Romney will win the nomination. I'd worry more about his support following that.


I'm not worried at all about it. I know that the liberal rhetoric is to keep pushing the "Romney doesn't have strong support" line as much as possible, but at a certain point, you're really just lying to yourselves and not fooling anyone else.

Quote:
Quote:
The guy's only the first GOP non-incumbent to win both Iowa and New Hampshire ever.

Tied Iowa. Possibly lost due to miscounts but, as I explained before, it's academic given the delegate distribution.


Does that excuse really make you feel safer?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#344 Jan 11 2012 at 5:43 PM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
gbaji wrote:


Does that excuse really make you feel safer?


Safer from what? Obama cruising into a second term without being challenged by a serious contender on the right?


____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#345 Jan 11 2012 at 6:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Does that excuse really make you feel safer?

Excuse? Does calling an (possible) 8 vote margin a "Win" and saying "OMG He WON Iowa!" really make you feel safer? Smiley: laugh

Romney just keeps on giving. On the same day the Newt Foundation releases their "King of Bain" video, Romney tells us that questions about distribution of wealth come from envy and that any discussion about things like tax policy should be kept to "quiet rooms"



Edited, Jan 11th 2012 6:17pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#346 Jan 11 2012 at 9:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Complete King of Bain video

Even if you're not inclined to watch the whole thing, do yourself the favor of skipping to the 8:00 mark and watching the next 45 seconds Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#347 Jan 11 2012 at 9:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
My favorite Romneyism is "I like to fire people."

By people, of course, he meant insurance companies, but since he believes corporations are people too, it's all one and the same.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#348 Jan 11 2012 at 10:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Complete King of Bain video

Even if you're not inclined to watch the whole thing, do yourself the favor of skipping to the 8:00 mark and watching the next 45 seconds Smiley: laugh

MITT ROMNEY KILLED KAY-BEE TOYS FOR $120M!

What a fuckhead.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#349 Jan 11 2012 at 10:29 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,000 posts
You can see why Gbaji likes this guy. Capitalism is his religion, and this is one of his high priests.
____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#350 Jan 11 2012 at 10:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Debalic wrote:
MITT ROMNEY KILLED KAY-BEE TOYS FOR $120M!

And broke a little boy's heart Smiley: frown
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#351 Jan 11 2012 at 10:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Romney was a decent Governor back when he was a moderate. I don't really know what to say about Romney 2.0: Presidential edition.

Bain Capitol people are douchebags though. Theyn didn't even pay for their own rooms & still ******* about the negotiated rates at my last hotel. Smiley: mad
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 73 All times are in CDT
Kavekkk, Anonymous Guests (72)