• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thefit

Member
ToxicAdam said:
In related news

ibvDOj0bFCmv8k.jpg
Click to expand...

Holy shit. lol both total assholes to boot
 
7

786110

Member
thefit said:
There is a story out there that one of the reasons the GOP is bailing on Mitts is not just because of the gaffs but because his team has been practicing and mock debating in preparation and that in those mock debates he's losing to the opponent.

I'll try to find the link but I'm drinking so if someone finds it first, great.
Click to expand...

was this it?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81428.html?hp=t1

The plan, described by top aides and advisers in interviews this week, is an acknowledgment that Romney is in enough of a hole that he cannot depend on the presidential debates to turn his candidacy around. In fact, Romney, who recently did five mock debates in a 48-hour period to practice, has confided to advisers that it may be hard to win a debate because every attack against President Barack Obama will seem stale while the attacks on him will seem fresher and newsier to a hostile media.
Click to expand...
 
C

codhand

Member
786110 said:
The plan, described by top aides and advisers in interviews this week, is an acknowledgment that Romney is in enough of a hole that he cannot depend on the presidential debates to turn his candidacy around. In fact, Romney, who recently did five mock debates in a 48-hour period to practice, has confided to advisers that it may be hard to win a debate because every attack against President Barack Obama will seem stale while the attacks on him will seem fresher and newsier to a hostile media.
Click to expand...

It's not newsier to have substance to your arguments.

fuck politico, washington insiders, instigating hacks, and fuck dave mustaine too

"We are going to look back at this as the week he got his act together, or the beginning of the end,” said a top Republican who works closely with the campaign.
Click to expand...

Real deep Politico, nice "top-Republican" quote grab. Seriously, I could write these articles, talking only to "aides", "top ___," and "sources close to ___".

ok goodnight for real.
 
R

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
If Romney was leading in the polls right now, would a "right-wing Nate Silver" exist right now?
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
After going WAT and doing some digging, apparently it's because we haven't had polls in SC since before the primaries, but even then they weren't entirely kind to Romney.

Who knows what's going on there. Nate Silver should have excluded it from his chart.
 
R

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Also, isn't it rather obvious that it's BigSicily running Unskewed Polls?
 
J

jamesinclair

Banned
So, when the dems dominate the election this year....

What are the chances that the GOP starts a state-splitting campaign?

Split Alaska in two = 2 more GOP senators.
Split Texas, = 2 more GOP senators

etc etc
 
D

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
jamesinclair said:
So, when the dems dominate the election this year....

What are the chances that the GOP starts a state-splitting campaign?

Split Texas, = 2 more GOP senators

etc etc
Click to expand...

Great, maybe just in time for the state to go blue from Hispanics.
 
A

Averon

Member
PantherLotus said:
...
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply Unskewed Polls will even touch the accuracy--and sanity--Nate brings to polling analysis. Unskewed Polls is a reaction to rightwing denial of the polls not going their way and not having a "go to" guy for polling analysis like Dems have with Nate; it was a void that was just asking to be filled.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
jamesinclair said:
So, when the dems dominate the election this year....

What are the chances that the GOP starts a state-splitting campaign?

Split Alaska in two = 2 more GOP senators.
Split Texas, = 2 more GOP senators

etc etc
Click to expand...
Democrats just make DC and Puerto Rico states and get 4 more Dem senators.

Also depending on how you split Texas they could easily be a Hispanic-dominated state that elects Democratic senators.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
In fact, Romney, who recently did five mock debates in a 48-hour period to practice, has confided to advisers that it may be hard to win a debate because every attack against President Barack Obama will seem stale while the attacks on him will seem fresher and newsier to a hostile media.
Click to expand...
'newsier'? Yeah, he wants truthiness.

hostile media? How long until Romney says "Lamestream media"?
 
M

Mario

Sidhe / PikPok
jamesinclair said:
So, when the dems dominate the election this year....

What are the chances that the GOP starts a state-splitting campaign?

Split Alaska in two = 2 more GOP senators.
Split Texas, = 2 more GOP senators

etc etc
Click to expand...

I'm sure succession talk would rear its head first.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
jamesinclair said:
So, when the dems dominate the election this year....

What are the chances that the GOP starts a state-splitting campaign?

Split Alaska in two = 2 more GOP senators.
Split Texas, = 2 more GOP senators

etc etc
Click to expand...

Yeah . . . try that and California will split into at least 3 states.

Alaska? They barely have enough people for one state.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
That's not a reaction to Nate, but rather polls in general. RCP has it at +4 for Obama. Without rasmussen RCP and 538 would be the same on the now cast. In fact the model is behind RCP.

You're right in that this is the reaction from the right but not directly to Nate.
 
P

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Averon said:
Unskewedpolls is the right's version of 538/Nate Silver. It was only a matter of time, to be honest.
Click to expand...

But Nate Silver doesn't change poll numbers. He aggregates them and then conducts statistical modeling. It's a complete disservice to Nate to even be compared in any way.

:.(
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
But Nate Silver doesn't change poll numbers. He aggregates them and then conducts statistical modeling. It's a complete disservice to Nate to even be compared in any way.
Click to expand...
Exactly. He doesn't even skew the polls back. The model figures out if a poll is right or left leaning and by how much on its own. He removes his own bias while trying to adjust for the bias of the pollsters through math rather than guessing.
 
V

viciouskillersquirrel

Member
Mario said:
Wait. What's it called when a State opts out of the US and becomes independent? Texas still has that ability in their state constitution or whatever right?
Click to expand...
Secession.

Texas may well have that right in their constitution, but let's see them carry it out. How would military troops and materiel be divided up? Do highways just default to the new country? What about other federal programs? Is there a plan in place for handover?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Basileus777 said:
Nate Silver seems to be a little salty that this unskewedpolls guy is surpassing him as the next celebrity pollster.
Click to expand...

haha really? I'd imagine he would find it laughable. I'm surprised he hasn't made a post addressing the conservative conspiracy theories on party ID biases

I'm more interested in whether the PEC model is right about dems having a 75% chance at winning the house, or whether The Monkey Cage is right that dems will gain 1 seat
http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/...that-democrats-will-gain-1-seat-in-the-house/

I think we can all agree Nate's presidential polls will pretty much be right, so that's boring. This is the real nerd pollster battle
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
haha really? I'd imagine he would find it laughable. I'm surprised he hasn't made a post addressing the conservative conspiracy theories on party ID biases

I'm more interested in whether the PEC model is right about dems having a 75% chance at winning the house, or whether The Monkey Cage is right that dems will gain 1 seat
http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/...that-democrats-will-gain-1-seat-in-the-house/

I think we can all agree Nate's presidential polls will pretty much be right, so that's boring. This is the real nerd pollster battle
Click to expand...
A 1-seat gain is highly implausible. The trajectory of Obama's victory points to a huge one, most likely either 332 EVs (wins every swing state but NC) or 347, and Democrats look likely to either keep their Senate majority or even expand it.

You could make the argument that Democrats will still have trouble winning the House even if they're winning the White House/Senate battles easily, thanks to gerrymandering and the incumbency effect, but come on.

Monkey Cage's model also has a huge margin of error attached to it.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
viciouskillersquirrel said:
Secession.

Texas may well have that right in their constitution, but let's see them carry it out. How would military troops and materiel be divided up? Do highways just default to the new country? What about other federal programs? Is there a plan in place for handover?
Click to expand...

If they wanted to leave, I'd be fine with that. Please. Go ahead. Make my day.
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
PhoenixDark said:
haha really? I'd imagine he would find it laughable. I'm surprised he hasn't made a post addressing the conservative conspiracy theories on party ID biases

I'm more interested in whether the PEC model is right about dems having a 75% chance at winning the house, or whether The Monkey Cage is right that dems will gain 1 seat
http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/...that-democrats-will-gain-1-seat-in-the-house/

I think we can all agree Nate's presidential polls will pretty much be right, so that's boring. This is the real nerd pollster battle
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to go with Silver on that. Your link is pretty up-front about fitting to a small number of predetermined variables, when the much larger history of House polling (a whole bunch of elections every 2 years instead of 1 election every 4 years) means that something like what Silver's doing is likely to work better for the House than for the presidency, provided there's some minimal amount of polling data to work with.

Edit: My bad, I thought Silver was doing House stuff too. What's PEC?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Gotchaye said:
I'm inclined to go with Silver on that. Your link is pretty up-front about fitting to a small number of predetermined variables, when the much larger history of House polling (a whole bunch of elections every 2 years instead of 1 election every 4 years) means that something like what Silver's doing is likely to work better for the House than for the presidency, provided there's some minimal amount of polling data to work with.

Edit: My bad, I thought Silver was doing House stuff too. What's PEC?
Click to expand...

princeton election consortium. They were spot on in 08 and 2010.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
His 2004 prediction is pretty tragic though...
Click to expand...

ha never saw it.

Speaking of 04, remember that documentary that was done for the election? I remember watching it a few years ago...it's from the Kerry team's perspective mainly, and when it starts getting clear Kerry is going to lose things get crazy and the doc abruptly ends
 
A

AniHawk

Member
PhoenixDark said:
ha never saw it.

Speaking of 04, remember that documentary that was done for the election? I remember watching it a few years ago...it's from the Kerry team's perspective mainly, and when it starts getting clear Kerry is going to lose things get crazy and the doc abruptly ends
Click to expand...

that sounds eerie
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
ha never saw it.

Speaking of 04, remember that documentary that was done for the election? I remember watching it a few years ago...it's from the Kerry team's perspective mainly, and when it starts getting clear Kerry is going to lose things get crazy and the doc abruptly ends
Click to expand...
Never saw. I do remember the documentary Pelosi's daughter made though about the 08 election, where she traveled to various states that surprisingly went for Obama, like North Carolina and Indiana, and some of the racist asshats there.

Here's his 2004 prediction. He predicted Kerry winning with 311 electoral votes - his fatal flaws were assuming (a) much higher Dem turnout than what actually happened and (b) the undecideds would break heavily towards Kerry. It's the same argument conservatives use this year whenever a poll shows Obama under 50 and of course it's complete bullshit.

The polls of "decided voters" on the other hand were right on the money with 286 EVs for Bush. I think he's learned from his mistakes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Eurogamer: Assassin's Creed boss discusses "devastating" impact of Shadows' diversity and inclusivity backlash
Drama 3 4 5 6 7
316
23K
EN250 replied
"We observed Nvidia and decided to wait" (Chief Architect of Gaming at AMD)
2
64
4K
Kataploom replied
[GI.biz] The future of storytelling with Ken Levine
27
1K
mitch1971 replied
[GI.biz] Cheap money and bad bets: How the games industry turned pandemic success into disaster
2
75
4K
sharp weiner replied
  • Poll
Palworld has, once again, highlighted the on going deficiencies in PC Game Pass and the Xbox app on Windows 11 (Windows Central)
Hardware Platform 2 3
111
14K
Unknown Soldier replied
Top Bottom