Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Final Stretch Election ThreadFollow

#102 Oct 31 2012 at 7:18 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
At this point in the campaign, it'd be nice to hear either side hold a rally or whatever and say "You know what, we don't need any more of your cash. We've already raised a billion dollars this cycle. Why don't you give that right to the Red Cross [or some other reputable charity]?"

Then after they lost the election, we'd remember the fondly probably until Thanksgiving.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#103 Oct 31 2012 at 8:15 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,078 posts
If the Romney camp was as enterprising as all that, they'd have been on the phone with poland springs days before hurricane sandy made landfall, ordering up billions of bottles of water with "VOTE ROMNEY" on the labels. Then had all his volunteers handing them out to storm victims.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#104 Nov 01 2012 at 12:29 AM Rating: Good
Sacrificial Lamb
*****
16,110 posts
Omega,
Were it that easy. I am in an undisclosed location where purchasing things like Premium is not inconvenient, but actually impossible. Moreover, I am only able to view this in HTML mode so I have no idea what your avatar is, thus will be unable to pick one out for you come Tuesday night. As it is, I am fortunate that the internet is not provided for me by smoke signals and semaphore flags.

However, a sig is something I can do. Let me know.

Totem
____________________________
Born-on date: 2076

Zombo.com

Obama

Winner of Last(tm) VIII!

Winner of the 2008 Allakhazam March Madness tourny

"Totem is the personification of whiskey soaked evil" --Annabelle

"You're special, pumpkin, but not speshuler than the 'Bama Black Snake" --AtomicFlea
#105 Nov 01 2012 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
You got it. You taking the side bet too?
____________________________
"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


#106 Nov 01 2012 at 3:52 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Nate Silver wrote:
7 polls released in Ohio in past 48 hours: Oversample +4, Oversample +5, Oversample +5, Oversample +5, Oversample +7, Oversample +7, Oversample +7. #notthatcomplicated


It's like you're reading my mind. It's not just oversampling, but also overweighting of democrats (depending on poll methodology). There's an 11 point shift in terms of party affiliation from Dem to GOP between 2008 and 2012, but many polls are weighting results based on an assumed turnout similar to 2008. While not all polls do this, even among those which don't some are reporting poll participation rates by Dems much higher than would be expected based on identity polling. Which either means that Dems are being over represented in one set or under represented in another (or some combination of the two). Given the trend based on 2010 figures, the former is more likely than the latter.

How much this affects the overall polling picture (like RCP) is hard to say, but I really wouldn't assume those numbers are accurate. Same thing happened in 2008 (only in reverse), where polling indicated a much closer race between McCain and Obama than ended out happening. Obama's slim leads in polling in key battleground states could easily really be large losses when it comes to election day. We'll find out in 5 days, I suppose.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#107 Nov 01 2012 at 4:01 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,900 posts
I find it funny that people make such a big deal about +1 Obama or +3 Romney when there's a margin or error of like 5% for some of these state polls. Then again if you don't ignore that margin of error I suppose nothing much has changed in the last several months, and that's no fun. Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#108 Nov 01 2012 at 4:04 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
It's like you're reading my mind.

Smiley: laugh Well, obviously.
someproteinguy wrote:
I find it funny that people make such a big deal about +1 Obama or +3 Romney when there's a margin or error of like 5% for some of these state polls

None of the Ohio polls have a 5pt MoE. It's closer around 3-3.5pts. But anyway, that's why you look at them in aggregate. When you have ten polls all showing an Obama lead and averaging, say, O+2.5 the chance of them all being wrong on the far edge of the MoE and the real answer being R+2 is pretty minimal.

Edited, Nov 1st 2012 5:09pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#109 Nov 01 2012 at 4:08 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,018 posts
It's a pop-up picture book.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#110 Nov 01 2012 at 4:13 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
I find it funny that people make such a big deal about +1 Obama or +3 Romney when there's a margin or error of like 5% for some of these state polls. Then again if you don't ignore that margin of error I suppose nothing much has changed in the last several months, and that's no fun. Smiley: frown


Yeah, pretty much. It really depends on the poll though. Some are pretty consistent, so you can track changes and say reliably that so-and-so is doing better/worse than a month ago. Others swing widely, so it's not just the margin of error you have to look at but longer term trends in said poll. But both kinds are only semi-effective at actually telling us how an election might turn out. And in this election, the methodologies are presenting us with a really big factor that usually isn't so huge. Obama energized a *huge* number of people in 2008 to turn out and vote Dem. Normally, the participation rates don't change much between elections, but it did that year. You really have to consider it an outlier in terms of Dem turnout. But polls don't change their methodology to account for this (because it's important for them to continue using the same formula every time, for obvious reasons).

You can see this when you look at RCP average polling. You'll see about half that show the candidates within a couple point spread (some with Romney up, some with Obama up, but all close), and another half that have Obama up by 5-8%. When averaged, those give a 2-3 point lead for Obama. But garbage in, garbage out, right? You're generating an average where a significant portion of the data being used is quite obviously not going to be accurate. But those are the numbers, and those are the methods used, so they continue to use them.

Can't measure the exact effect of this, but you could almost safely say that any poll that uses this methodology (at any point in their process) is likely to be off by 5+ points. You could even stretch that (if you wanted to really crunch numbers) and speculate that they could be off by as much as 10-12 points. This could result in anything from a very tight win for Romney, to a landslide for him. In any case, it's almost certain that a whole lot of people are going to be surprised by the actual election results and wonder why they were so different from the polling data they were counting on being true.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#111 Nov 01 2012 at 4:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,900 posts
Smiley: eek

Whatever happened to dialing up 1,000 people at random and asking them who they were going to vote for? Smiley: confused
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#112 Nov 01 2012 at 4:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
You can see this when you look at RCP average polling. You'll see about half that show the candidates within a couple point spread (some with Romney up, some with Obama up, but all close), and another half that have Obama up by 5-8%.

Do you even look at the RCP site or do you just mindlessly parrot whatever someone else tells you? RCP has a single poll since Oct 10th in Ohio with Romney up (a Rasmussen poll from a few days ago). Every other poll out of the nine in the main calculation right now has Obama leading. Obama's largest lead in an Ohio poll from the main calculation is +5.

Seriously, there's no way you could honestly be looking at the numbers you try to speak so authoritatively on and say the things you say.

Unless you're responding to a tweet about Ohio polling by talking about polling in... umm... Montana or something. I dunno.

someproteinguy wrote:
Whatever happened to dialing up 1,000 people at random and asking them who they were going to vote for? Smiley: confused

You would be best to ignore Gbaji on this topic. Last time he was swearing that no one was using Likely Voter screens when only a single pollster out of eleven (Gallup) wasn't using one. Gbaji literally has no idea what he's talking about and would rather just bluster statements than take half a second to look at a site and verify what he's trying to tell you.

Edited, Nov 1st 2012 5:24pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#113 Nov 01 2012 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Romney continues to impress everyone with his sterling foreign relations acumen.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#114 Nov 01 2012 at 8:15 PM Rating: Good
******
44,018 posts
Article wrote:
The Republican presidential candidate seems to be possessed of a sublime capacity for, well, ******* them (Italians) off.
In Romney's defense, that's not exactly difficult to do. We're a hot blooded breed.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#115 Nov 01 2012 at 8:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Mama mia! Dey Romney, he-a being insulting to-a dey economy! Pass-a dey spaghetti!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#116 Nov 01 2012 at 8:35 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Mama mia! Dey Romney, he-a being insulting to-a dey economy! Pass-a dey spaghetti!


If you're going to do a Jar-Jar impression, wouldn't my Star Wars thread would be a more suitable venue?
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#117 Nov 01 2012 at 9:06 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,470 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Smiley: eek

Whatever happened to dialing up 1,000 people at random and asking them who they were going to vote for? Smiley: confused


Cell phones. You can't call them for political purposes and the majority of them are unlisted numbers.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
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 on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#118 Nov 01 2012 at 9:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You can call cell phones for polling but it has to be a live person calling. You're not allowed to robo-poll cell phones (which means polling firms like Rasmussen miss them).
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#119 Nov 01 2012 at 10:31 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,984 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Romney continues to impress everyone with his sterling foreign relations acumen.

But it really shows off his business skills, which apparently is a prime requisite for the presidency.
____________________________
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.
#120 Nov 01 2012 at 11:23 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,917 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Smiley: eek

Whatever happened to dialing up 1,000 people at random and asking them who they were going to vote for? Smiley: confused


They still do, my roommate interned at a polling station this past spring.

But it is true that it has become much more difficult to get a representative sample, because more and more people are disconnecting their home phones, and it's much harder to get access to cell numbers. And you don't want to include both, because it would be a serious issue if you double listed 1/3 of the people in your set.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#121 Nov 02 2012 at 7:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The GOP must see the writing on the wall because they're already laying the groundwork for a "stolen election" complaint:
Quote:
The Republican National Committee alleges voting machines in Nevada and five other states are flawed and improperly showing votes for President Obama instead of GOP nominee Mitt Romney.

In a letter sent Thursday to state election officials, the RNC's chief counsel says a "significant number" of cases have been reported of votes showing up for Obama when a voter selected Romney on the touch-screen machines.

The letter does not allege votes were actually recorded for the wrong candidate.

Man, if only someone thought that they should still have paper ballots as part of the process that could be physically checked and confirmed...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#122 Nov 02 2012 at 7:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,470 posts
So, people are telling Republicans "I totally pressed the Romney button but it says I voted for Obama instead!"

I wonder how many of them had their fingers crossed when saying that. Smiley: laugh
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
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 on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#123 Nov 02 2012 at 7:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
For all I know, it's true. Seeing as how I've been against fully digital systems for years, I'd have a hard time mustering much sympathy.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#124 Nov 02 2012 at 7:30 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,470 posts
It could have been a misconfiguration, definitely. And it could be displaying Obama at the end review, but still recording the vote for Romney, because someone copied and pasted the code wrong.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
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 on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#125 Nov 02 2012 at 7:37 AM Rating: Good
*****
19,917 posts
I'm surprised they've made this allegation, honestly, with how much voter tampering was orchestrated by people on the right this election. You'd think they'd try and suppress news about it unless they actually had something substantiated...

Then again, a lot of people would hear this, assume it's absolute fact, and assume that it's actually a liberal scheme. Even if it's happening, the chances of it being intentional are slim to none.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#126 Nov 02 2012 at 7:39 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
For all I know, it's true. Seeing as how I've been against fully digital systems for years

Why? Aside from random "I'm a control freak and I understand how paper ballots work, but not really digital ones therefore NO ONE CAN!" issues. Why in the world would you think it was harder to game paper ballots. Every digital voting issue is alarming ONLY because of it's novelty. There are literally thousands of ways to abuse paper ballots. If you're concerned about fraud, the absolute only viable solution is non anonymous balloting. Otherwise, every system is gamable, and gamable systems will be gamed. How frequently this affects outcomes is another issue entirely. It's fairly likely the answer is almost not at all.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#127 Nov 02 2012 at 7:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Why?

Because digital+paper solutions have more ways of determining error or checking results. I've gone over it with Gbaji enough times so if you want all the details, just search for voting machines and pretend you're Gbaji and we're debating it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#128 Nov 02 2012 at 7:43 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,018 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The GOP must see the writing on the wall because they're already laying the groundwork for a "stolen election" complaint:
I kind of figured the groundwork for that started with all the new voter registration issues they were dealing with.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#130 Nov 02 2012 at 8:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Any port in a storm, huh?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#132 Nov 02 2012 at 8:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
You confuse mirth with snippiness. I suppose you believe Romney is "Expanding the map" as well.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#133 Nov 02 2012 at 8:12 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,018 posts
Katrina really hurt the Dems.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#134 Nov 02 2012 at 8:13 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,470 posts
Because Republicans would have totally found some private sector way of preventing the hurricane from hitting the NE.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
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 on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#135 Nov 02 2012 at 8:21 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
catwho wrote:
Because Republicans would have totally found some private sector way of preventing the hurricane from hitting the NE.

No, he means that you're less apt to stand in the rain waiting for a bus than you are to get in your own car and drive to the polling place. Which is true, but PA is Democratic enough that pinning your hopes on a 5+% swing due to rain is more a sign of concern than confidence.


Edited, Nov 2nd 2012 9:21am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#136 Nov 02 2012 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,900 posts
Smiley: disappointed

Voting should be done lounging in your sweatpants on the couch, accompanied by a cold beer and nice warm blanket. Granted it can be hard to go out and drop your ballot the mailbox afterwards, but you can always do that the next morning when you have to leave for work.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#137 Nov 02 2012 at 9:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Rasmussen showing a tie this morning; be interesting to see if it holds up. National polls pulling towards state averages rather than the reverse = bad news for Romney.

Edit: Someone else noted that, for Rasmussen to have a R+2 result for a couple days in their rolling average and then have a one-day switch to a tie, last night's individual results had to be something like O+3.

Edited, Nov 2nd 2012 3:43pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#138 Nov 02 2012 at 3:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
You can see this when you look at RCP average polling. You'll see about half that show the candidates within a couple point spread (some with Romney up, some with Obama up, but all close), and another half that have Obama up by 5-8%.

Do you even look at the RCP site or do you just mindlessly parrot whatever someone else tells you? RCP has a single poll since Oct 10th in Ohio with Romney up (a Rasmussen poll from a few days ago). Every other poll out of the nine in the main calculation right now has Obama leading. Obama's largest lead in an Ohio poll from the main calculation is +5.


I was speaking about polling in general. Not just Ohio.

someproteinguy wrote:
Whatever happened to dialing up 1,000 people at random and asking them who they were going to vote for? Smiley: confused


They do start out that way. Then they adjust the results by weighting the party affiliation of the respondents. Let me explain how this works.

Let's say that in the exit polls from the 2008 election 40% reported themselves as democrats, 30% reported as republicans, and 30% were "other/independent/whatever". You then conduct a poll of 1000 random people and ask them who they're going to vote for in this election. As part of the poll, you ask people's party identity and 35% say they are democrats, 35% say they are republicans, and 30 say they are "other/whatever" (yes, I'm contriving these numbers for simplicity of the math).

Let's also assume that both groups who identify as republican and democrat vote their candidate and the others break for Romney 20-10. The result of your poll would be 55% Romney, 45% Obama (yeah, I'm ignoring "don't know" answers as well to also make this simple). But since the sample you polled doesn't match the ratio of the last election, we must adjust for that. So we weight each Obama vote and Romney vote according to the ratio of the sample in the poll to the sample in the last election (40/35 versus 35/40 respectively). So the results look like this:

Obama. 45*(40/35) = 51.390
Romney 55*(35/40) = 48.125


And magically, a poll that actually resulted in Romney +10% transforms into Obama +3.2%

Normally, weighting based on the last election is a good method to determine relative party turnout because usually party turnout and affiliation doesn't change that much from one election to the next. But 2008 really was an outlier in terms of Dem turnout and identification (and no one is remotely attempting to claim otherwise). Using those exit polls to weight polling in this election is going to result in significantly wrong results. But polls use the same methodology every time so as to ensure consistency. You can't blame them for this. But you really do have to understand that this means that a significant portion of polls out there are not remotely accurate.

Edited, Nov 2nd 2012 2:20pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#139 Nov 02 2012 at 3:25 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Oh. Let me add that they do weighting like this because as a couple people have mentioned, it's very hard to get a good representative sample in political polls. Especially ones that are continually running during the lead up to an election. You just don't have time to get a large enough sample. You've got say 3 days to get a poll in the field and get results posted. You take what you can, and then weight the sample. Nothing wrong with the methodology. It's what you have to do to get polling accomplished and reasonably accurate. It's just that the result is really only "relatively accurate" (relative to other polls taken with the same methodology), not "absolutely accurate" (accurate relative to reality).
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#140 Nov 02 2012 at 4:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Actually, many polls don't weight. A few do and some are big names (Gallup, for instance) but the idea that they're all weighted is completely erroneous.

That said, it's time to put on your denial blinders so you don't have to see today's polling...
Today's state polls wrote:
Colorado: Obama 46%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Colorado: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (Public Policy Polling)
Colorado: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Denver Post/SurveyUSA)
Florida: Obama 48%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Iowa: Obama 49%, Romney 45% (Gravis)
Michigan: Obama 52%, Romney 47% (Rasmussen)
Michigan: Obama 52%, Romney 46% (Public Policy Polling)
Nevada: Obama 50%, Romney 44% (Mellman)
New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 44% (New England College)
New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 49% (Gravis)
Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 47% (CNN/ORC)
Ohio: Obama 49%, Romney 49% (Rasmussen)
Ohio: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (We Ask America)
Virginia: Obama 48%, Romney 45% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Virginia: Obama 49%, Romney 48% (We Ask America)
Wisconsin: Obama 52%, Romney 45% (We Ask America)
Today's national polls wrote:
ABC News/Washington Post: Obama 49%, Romney 48%
Public Policy Polling: Obama 49%, Romney 48%
Purple Strategies: Obama 47%, Romney 46%
Rasmussen: Obama 48%, Romney 48%
Reuters/Ipsos: Obama 46%, Romney 46%
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#141 Nov 02 2012 at 5:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Jophiel wrote:
Actually, many polls don't weight. A few do and some are big names (Gallup, for instance) but the idea that they're all weighted is completely erroneous.

That said, it's time to put on your denial blinders so you don't have to see today's polling...
Today's state polls wrote:
Colorado: Obama 46%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Colorado: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (Public Policy Polling)
Colorado: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Denver Post/SurveyUSA)
Florida: Obama 48%, Romney 46% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Iowa: Obama 49%, Romney 45% (Gravis)
Michigan: Obama 52%, Romney 47% (Rasmussen)
Michigan: Obama 52%, Romney 46% (Public Policy Polling)
Nevada: Obama 50%, Romney 44% (Mellman)
New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 44% (New England College)
New Hampshire: Obama 50%, Romney 49% (Gravis)
Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 47% (CNN/ORC)
Ohio: Obama 49%, Romney 49% (Rasmussen)
Ohio: Obama 47%, Romney 45% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Ohio: Obama 50%, Romney 46% (We Ask America)
Virginia: Obama 48%, Romney 45% (Reuters/Ipsos)
Virginia: Obama 49%, Romney 48% (We Ask America)
Wisconsin: Obama 52%, Romney 45% (We Ask America)
Today's national polls wrote:
ABC News/Washington Post: Obama 49%, Romney 48%
Public Policy Polling: Obama 49%, Romney 48%
Purple Strategies: Obama 47%, Romney 46%
Rasmussen: Obama 48%, Romney 48%
Reuters/Ipsos: Obama 46%, Romney 46%

gbaji wrote:
You guys keep throwing out facts like they mean something.

____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#142 Nov 02 2012 at 6:20 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
Anyone think that this race will be as close as it's being stated? I want to know the who the next president will be before I go to sleep, not find out 3 days later...

I'm looking at you Florida...
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#143 Nov 02 2012 at 8:13 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Actually, many polls don't weight. A few do and some are big names (Gallup, for instance) but the idea that they're all weighted is completely erroneous.


I didn't say that they "all weight". I said that many do. And more importantly some of the biggest names do (Quinnipiac does as well, which is where NYT and CBS get their polling data). In politics, the more frequent the polls, the more likely they are to use weighting to account for the lack of a large and accurate enough polling sample.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#144gbaji, Posted: Nov 02 2012 at 8:17 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) IMO, it's either going to be really close or it will be a blowout for Romney. Depends on whether the weighting issue really is as significant as it appears. If it isn't, it'll be close. If it is, it wont be. ****, if the weighting issue is as significant as some conservatives are suggesting, Romney will easily win all the battleground states, and pick up several that are currently considered safe for Obama. I don't happen to think it's that huge a factor, but I think it's going to be more of a factor that some think. I suspect that many liberals will be looking at the election results on Tuesday and crying foul because the polls just couldn't have been that far off, so something must have happened.
#145 Nov 02 2012 at 8:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I didn't say that they "all weight". I said that many do.

And many don't.

But what they have in common? Romney losing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#146 Nov 02 2012 at 9:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
Anyone think that this race will be as close as it's being stated? I want to know the who the next president will be before I go to sleep

You'll likely be able to go to bed as soon as they call Ohio.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#147 Nov 02 2012 at 9:07 PM Rating: Good
*****
19,917 posts
Quote:
IMO, it's either going to be really close or it will be a blowout for Romney.

____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#148 Nov 02 2012 at 9:08 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
Gbaji wrote:
IMO, it's either going to be really close


I've been switching from liberal to conservative media and it seems to me that only Republicans think that it will be REALLY close.

Gbaji wrote:
or it will be a blowout for Romney....... Romney will easily win all the battleground states, and pick up several that are currently considered safe for Obama.


I don't want to stick my foot in my mouth, because anything is possible, but I don't think anyone on any sides believe that to be likely.

Gbaji wrote:

Believe it. The polls really can be that far off.


That tends to happen when you're poling less than 1/2 of 1% of a population.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#149 Nov 02 2012 at 11:03 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,582 posts
If you were given an even bet then smart money would be on Obama, largely due to his present polling lead in Ohio. And if we want to give weight to these predictions I guess I'll throw in a year of premium on Obama to anyone taking up the offer in the next 24 hours. It's not settled by any means, but it's not nail bitingly close either.

edit: To clarify, in case anyone decides to be petty, accepting of the offer implies that should Obama win the 2012 presidential election you'd buy me a year of premium and should he lose, I'd buy you a year of premium, good for 24 hours as of posting this.

Edited, Nov 3rd 2012 12:06am by Allegory
#150 Nov 02 2012 at 11:17 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,473 posts
Quote:
I've been switching from liberal to conservative media and it seems to me that only Republicans think that it will be REALLY close.


Wouldn't that mean that only Democrats think it will NOT be close?

However if Obama gets Ohio it is pretty much over, Romney would essentially need to run the toss table including Flordia, Virgina (essentially tied), Nevada, New Hampshire, Iowa (leaning Blue), North Carolina and Colorado (Leaning Red), and if Obama takes Florida, it is pretty much over. Anyone who thinks this is close is out of touch, it is either going to be a lopside Romney win, or Obama is going to have the win before the West Coast can even cast ballots.

As far as popular vote, ya it might be close, but the electoral system dictates it will either be a blow out in terms of a Romney win, or it will be a blow out in terms of the race to 271 for Obama.

Quote:
That tends to happen when you're poling less than 1/2 of 1% of a population.

Thats not how polling works. It is actually a very accurate mathematical extrapolation of opinion. It is remarkably accurate. Why do you think Apple has a new Iphone every year, because shmucks fill out those online surveys and say, ya id buy the new iphone when it comes out with those new features. It is a very powerful piece of information gathering, for marketing, and political discussion. However that is not to say that the numbers can and likely are in some cases manipulated, depending on target audience of course.










Edited, Nov 3rd 2012 1:18am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#151 Nov 02 2012 at 11:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
In case you're bored, here's nine different polling aggregate sites and their predictions on who'll win, all on one page.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 57 All times are in CDT
Bijou, Poldaran, someproteinguy, stupidmonkey, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (52)