What will happen if Obama wins?
A pretty little chorus line of Ruth Bader Ginsburg clones, flooding the courts, genetically engineered to live to be at least 100 years old. It will be glorious, I tell you!
GLORIOUS.
What will happen if Obama wins?
Everyone saw this, right?So, to summarize today's polling:
Ohio: O +1
Florida: O +1
Virginia: O +2
If Romney wins, this forum will be filled with posts echoing your "people are stupid" rather then taking BO to task for being a failure. Trust me.
Obama would fail in so far as being reelected.
But if Romney is elected, it just proves we are very stupid. I mean that sincerely and as someone who has never been and is not a Democrat.
Romney's proposals to date are ludicrous.
Romney and Ryan should have been laughed off the stage months ago if our electorate has any semblance of intelligence.
Everyone saw this, right?
Normally, I'd be all over you disagreeing but...yeah. Considering Romney would undo almost ALL of Obama's achievements, I guess you could say he was a failure...from a certain point of view.
If you are a Democrat, press 1. If a Republican, press 2. If you are an independent or identify with another party, press 3.
Democrat ........................................................ 42%
Republican ...................................................... 34%
Independent/Other .......................................... 23%
But you're not a likely voter so your vote doesn't count.I'm a first time voter. Went to early voting today and voted for Barack Obama.
That is far less childish than simply writing off the electorate (many of whom put Obama in office) as stupid.
Yeah but Obama winning those important swing states by a whisker's margin will do little to soothe chicken littles.
and now the bad news about ppp's ohio poll:
previously it was 40-36-24. more democrats responded and the overall total went down.
-less self-identified as conservatives, sand more identified as moderates
-was 84-11-5 for races (white-black-other), now 80-13-7
-age remained mostly unchanged, except more people now break for the under 45 age range
-more women than men were polled this time (54-46 vs. 53-47)
-people thought obama won the debate 48-39
so basically what happened was, in general, all the demographics that might help out obama increased pretty nicely, and yet he went down by four points in a week. again though, this was roughly tied last week on friday, and somehow got a huge boost on saturday. so last saturday was probably an extreme outlier.
39-31-29 was the party breakdown in ohio in 2008
Those numbers might be somewhat comforting if we were a week or less away from the election. But Romney's been gaining and he's not slowing down much, so why wouldn't he go over those numbers?
Maybe you should start feeling like you did in 2000. ;_;
Charlie Cook:
An Ohio recount would drive me up a wall.
Everyone saw this, right?
and now the bad news about ppp's ohio poll:
previously it was 40-36-24. more democrats responded and the overall total went down.
-less self-identified as conservatives, sand more identified as moderates
-was 84-11-5 for races (white-black-other), now 80-13-7
-age remained mostly unchanged, except more people now break for the under 45 age range
-more women than men were polled this time (54-46 vs. 53-47)
-people thought obama won the debate 48-39
so basically what happened was, in general, all the demographics that might help out obama increased pretty nicely, and yet he went down by four points in a week. again though, this was roughly tied last week on friday, and somehow got a huge boost on saturday. so last saturday was probably an extreme outlier.
39-31-29 was the party breakdown in ohio in 2008
edit
the biggest difference between the two polls: on the 12-13, they polled 880 likely voters. for the 18-20, they polled 532
Yeah that makes very little scene.Honestly sounds like noise...not to disregard or discount the poll, but it's weird that the sample would move towards Obama and yet he'd swing pretty heavily the other way. I CAN SAFELY DISCARD THIS POLL AND BREATHE INTO MY BAG WITH CONFIDENCE~
Well, the national polls actually show Romney receding a little.
Is it surprising his position's not supported by the evidence? There's no evidence that the most positive campaigns enjoy the most electoral success. Rather, winning campaigns in close elections tend to be more negative.Bush Sr won because of Willie Horton Jr.
Bush Jr won first election because of voter fraud
Bush Jr won the second election due to despicable swift boat veterans for truth nonsense
Which one is 30? This is my first time voting in CA, Pennsylvania was not this overwhelming.
I'm voting to ban the death penalty. Haven't really looked at the other ones yet except for the torrent of advertisement on 27.
If you need more proof the electorate is stupid, just look at how in some of the swing states the Dem Senate candidate is outperforming Obama by quite a bit.
YEAH WE WANT YOU IN OFFICE TO BE UNABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH ON YOUR POLICIES. HERP DE DERP.
In an informed electorate, romney and ryan would not have been allowed to get anywhere close to this point.
I see no point in calling the electorate stupid; ultimately the issue lies with the campaign. Obama is virtually tied in Ohio with a guy who wanted to bankrupt the auto industry; likewise he's virtually tied with someone in Florida who wants to turn Medicare into a voucher.
The problem lies with the candidate and his party's poor messaging.
I see no point in calling the electorate stupid; ultimately the issue lies with the campaign. Obama is virtually tied in Ohio with a guy who wanted to bankrupt the auto industry; likewise he's virtually tied with someone in Florida who wants to turn Medicare into a voucher.
The problem lies with the candidate and his party's poor messaging.
Stop using that acronym. It's insulting and trollish.If Romney wins, this forum will be filled with posts echoing your "people are stupid" rather then taking BO to task for being a failure. Trust me.
Stop using that acronym. It's insulting and trollish.
Honestly sounds like noise...not to disregard or discount the poll, but it's weird that the sample would move towards Obama and yet he'd swing pretty heavily the other way. I CAN SAFELY DISCARD THIS POLL AND BREATHE INTO MY BAG WITH CONFIDENCE~
I see no point in calling the electorate stupid; ultimately the issue lies with the campaign. Obama is virtually tied in Ohio with a guy who wanted to bankrupt the auto industry; likewise he's virtually tied with someone in Florida who wants to turn Medicare into a voucher.
The problem lies with the candidate and his party's poor messaging.
To be fair, that's how he signs his own tweets, heh.
GAF doesn't have a character limit and kevitivity is doing it on purpose to irritate people.
If the gop repeats it enough it becomes fact.I lump any talk saying Obama hasn't shown any plan for the future right along with crap about him not having a record to run on. Pure BS. Listen to any stump speech or any ad on TV from him. What's worse about this is people like Chris Matthews repeating this crap. He of all people should know better.
another point about the ppp polls:
oct18-20: 532 lvs
obama: 49
romney: 48
oct12-13: 880 lvs
obama: 51
romney: 46
sep27-30: 897 lvs
obama: 49
romney: 45
sep7-9: 1072 lvs
obama: 50
romney: 45
obama's been consistently averaged around 50 points. romney had some support for him shoot up, but it's possible the results aren't quite as solid due to the smaller sample size.
I see no point in calling the electorate stupid; ultimately the issue lies with the campaign. Obama is virtually tied in Ohio with a guy who wanted to bankrupt the auto industry; likewise he's virtually tied with someone in Florida who wants to turn Medicare into a voucher.
Stop using that acronym. It's insulting and trollish.
There are smart people left, right, and center who feel that an informed electorate will see it their way. Welcome to politics.
Hm. I'm loving these poll breakdowns.Obama leads 3-1 with early voters a week ago, 2-1 with early voters today. That's the swing. Note that the sample of early voters is about a hundred people.
I lump any talk saying Obama hasn't shown any plan for the future right along with crap about him not having a record to run on. Pure BS. Listen to any stump speech or any ad on TV from him. What's worse about this is people like Chris Matthews repeating this crap. He of all people should know better.
Yup. I'm not worried about OH.Indeed, if the tightening were from Obama dropping much below 50, I'd be a bit concerned.. but it's mainly been from Romney's gains.
This is what we've seen over the past week for Ohio:
SUSA - Obama +3
FOX News - Obama +3
Rasmussen - Obama +1
PPP - Obama +1
Gravis - Tie
Marist - Obama +6
CNN - Obama +4
Obama's still got Ohio.
Stop using that acronym. It's insulting and trollish.
Romney is an extension of W. Bush. People would vote Obama in a super landslide right now over W. Bush.
That is why the electorate is stupid, partly. I'm not being childish. I've always been of the belief that the people, as a whole, tend to be stupid.
In an informed electorate, romney and ryan would not have been allowed to get anywhere close to this point.
How many likely voters did the fox poll have?Oh wow, only 532 likely voters? that's like 4.5 MoE. That's pretty big.
The last one was over 800 likely voters. The noise is going to be far greater in the new one.
Obama leads 3-1 with early voters a week ago, 2-1 with early voters today. That's the swing. Note that the sample of early voters is about a hundred people.
How many likely voters did the fox poll have?
This is just a really lazy argument--if you can even call it an argument. All you can come up with when a candidate loses is that the electorate is stupid? And when your candidate wins, are they suddenly intelligent again?
SUSA - Obama +3 (613 lvs)How many likely voters did the fox poll have?