• 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 |OT4|: Your job is not to worry about 47% of these posts.

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AniHawk

Member
i was looking at 538 during the midterms and saw that nate was off 10 seats in either direction.

the thing his model doesn't account for is voter enthusiasm. when voters are enthusiastic, tend to vote in far greater numbers than predicted. it happened in 2010, and it happened in 2008... where his model was off by several points in some key states, and didn't expect obama to take north carolina or indiana.

unfortunately, there's no 2006 or 2004 to compare to. 2004 was a more normal election, but no one was really impassioned to get rid of bush outside of liberals. independents liked him enough, and the results matched polling averages pretty closely.

obama's gotta hope enthusiasm for him is at least where it was for bush, and then he'll win on very close state polls. but if enthusiasm for romney is like where it was in 2010, then he might beat some of the polls come election day.
 
Kevitivity

Kevitivity

Member
Diablos said:
Fucking unbelievable.

Given that this is an election about the economy, I can't see the third debate doing much for Obama even if he wins. Unless, of course, Mitt kicks his ass.
Click to expand...

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Conventional wisdom says that the debates don't matter much.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Kevitivity said:
Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Conventional wisdom says that the debates don't matter much.
Click to expand...
Except the first debate re-legitimized Romney in the eyes of a lot of people who were scratching their heads. Silver even touched on that in his latest post.

AniHawk said:
i was looking at 538 during the midterms and saw that nate was off 10 seats in either direction.

the thing his model doesn't account for is voter enthusiasm. when voters are enthusiastic, tend to vote in far greater numbers than predicted. it happened in 2010, and it happened in 2008... where his model was off by several points in some key states, and didn't expect obama to take north carolina or indiana.

unfortunately, there's no 2006 or 2004 to compare to. 2004 was a more normal election, but no one was really impassioned to get rid of bush outside of liberals. independents liked him enough, and the results matched polling averages pretty closely.

obama's gotta hope enthusiasm for him is at least where it was for bush, and then he'll win on very close state polls. but if enthusiasm for romney is like where it was in 2010, then he might beat some of the polls come election day.
Click to expand...
I think we're basically looking at Tea Party USA + traditional GOP out in full force here. Bams has to be able to match or exceed that where it counts, or we're fucked.
 
Kevitivity

Kevitivity

Member
Diablos said:
Except the first debate re-legitimized Romney in the eyes of a lot of people who were scratching their heads. Silver even touched on that in his latest post.


I think we're basically looking at Tea Party USA + traditional GOP out in full force here. Bams has to be able to match or exceed that where it counts.
Click to expand...

It's very hard for me to believe that one debate change so many minds. I think people are just starting to pay attention with the election so close.
 
A

AniHawk

Member
Kevitivity said:
It's very hard for me to believe that one debate change so many minds. I think people are just starting to pay attention with the election so close.
Click to expand...

that's also a possibility. most people who vote early do it in the weekend before the election. they probably feel like they need to get in as much info as possible.
 
T

TacticalFox88

Banned
Kevitivity said:
It's very hard for me to believe that one debate change so many minds. I think people are just starting to pay attention with the election so close.
Click to expand...

That being said, I still will live by the mantra that if Obama had performed in the first debate like he did with the second debate he would've put the nail in the coffin of Romney's campaign.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Nate Cohn has a few thoughts on Ohio:

tnr said:
1) Obama's lead is small, but consistent

On average, Obama leads by 1.9 points in surveys conducted entirely after the first debate. But although Obama’s lead is relatively modest, it’s also consistent....

2) Obama is beneath 49 percent.

Most Ohio polls show Obama beneath 49 percent, averaging about 47.8 percent of the vote. That gives Romney a more credible path to victory than he has in Wisconsin, Iowa, or Nevada, where the majority of polls show Obama at or above 49 percent....

3) There isn’t strong evidence that Romney has made additional gains since his initial post-debate bump....

Four polling firms have conducted multiple surveys since the first debate, and two show Obama making gains, one shows no change, and one poll shows Romney improving....

4) Obama holds a larger lead in polls that survey cell phones....

At the moment, every automated survey that doesn’t contact cell phones now shows Obama leading by 1 point or less, while Obama leads by at least 3 points in every poll contacting cell phone (with the exception of the dubious ARG poll) voters....

5) Several of Obama’s better pre-debate pollsters are still outstanding.

Although just about all of Romney's better surveys have reported post-debate results in Ohio, several of Obama's better pollsters haven't resurveyed the Buckeye State....

The Washington Post, CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac, and the Columbus Dispatch each showed Obama leading by at least 9 points prior to the first presidential debate. While Obama probably won’t lead by anything near as much in their next surveys, they each seem likely to show Obama leading by more than 1.9 points. In contrast, each of Romney’s best surveys has polled since the first presidential debate, and Republican-leaning firms like ARG and WAA have jumped into the fray.
Click to expand...

http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate...you-need-know-about-obamas-lead-in-ohio-polls
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
AniHawk said:
i was looking at 538 during the midterms and saw that nate was off 10 seats in either direction.

the thing his model doesn't account for is voter enthusiasm. when voters are enthusiastic, tend to vote in far greater numbers than predicted. it happened in 2010, and it happened in 2008... where his model was off by several points in some key states, and didn't expect obama to take north carolina or indiana.

unfortunately, there's no 2006 or 2004 to compare to. 2004 was a more normal election, but no one was really impassioned to get rid of bush outside of liberals. independents liked him enough, and the results matched polling averages pretty closely.

obama's gotta hope enthusiasm for him is at least where it was for bush, and then he'll win on very close state polls. but if enthusiasm for romney is like where it was in 2010, then he might beat some of the polls come election day.
Click to expand...

Polling for house races isn't very good. I wouldn't look at 2010 as anything.

Anyway, looking forward to a day of football and hopefully D12's debut. I suggest everyone here take a 12 hour break that doesn't include sleeping, as well.
 
D

Diablos

Member
pigeon said:
Nate Cohn has a few thoughts on Ohio:



http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate...you-need-know-about-obamas-lead-in-ohio-polls
Click to expand...
Mildly reassuring. Let's get those "better pollsters" for Obama out there, pls.

re: the first debate, I think anyone assuming Obama could get 350+ EV's again was nuts. It was gonna tighten. But I truly think the difference between Obama not showing up and showing up -- even if he still failed but did a respectable job -- cost him ~2 points he will never get back. That 2 points translates into more enthusiasm from GOPers and right leaning indys, which translates into tighter polling in battlegrounds. It's a domino effect fueled by hype, the media, uncertainty, advertising, etc. etc. There's a certain psychological fallout associated with the first debate that isn't typical.
 
B

Baraka in the White House

2-Terms of Kombat
Diablos said:
Mildly reassuring. Let's get those "better pollsters" for Obama out there, pls.

re: the first debate, I think anyone assuming Obama could get 350+ EV's again was nuts. It was gonna tighten. But I truly think the difference between Obama not showing up and showing up -- even if he still failed but did a respectable job -- cost him ~2 points he will never get back. That 2 points translates into more enthusiasm from GOPers and right leaning indys, which translates into tighter polling in battlegrounds. It's a domino effect fueled by hype, the media, uncertainty, advertising, etc. etc. There's a certain psychological fallout associated with the first debate that isn't typical.
Click to expand...

Mostly attributable to the Obama base shitting its collective pants.
 
The Chosen One

The Chosen One

Member
Can anyone give me a summery of what's happened on PoliGaf the last day? From the last couple of pages it sounds like you guys are in depressed/panic mode again.
 
D

Diablos

Member
Baraka in the White House said:
Mostly attributable to the Obama base shitting its collective pants.
Click to expand...
Sure, it killed enthusiasm. Everyone wanted Obama to seal the deal or at least hold his own and he did neither. That smarts. Meanwhile Romney basically moderated the debate and did whatever he wanted for 90 minutes, and it woke up the GOPers who, pre-debate, were bracing for the worst. It was unprecedented really.

And on the other side of the equation you have indys starting to give Romney a second look because Americans love acting like politics is reality television. It was truly a worst case scenario moment that no one was anticipating.

Talk about a paradigm shift...
 
A

AniHawk

Member
pigeon said:
Technically, "because it's solidly consistent with the 2-3 point lead that Obama has held in Ohio pretty much all month" is a reason that we do already know.
Click to expand...

BUT OBAMA'S TRADITIONALLY SUPPORTIVE BASE INCREASED AND HIS OVERALL SUPPORT WENT DOWN TWO POINTS.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
AniHawk said:
BUT OBAMA'S TRADITIONALLY SUPPORTIVE BASE INCREASED AND HIS OVERALL SUPPORT WENT DOWN TWO POINTS.
Click to expand...

So? All those changes are equally in line with a normal poll fluctuation. Obviously if Obama's doing worse in a given poll he's likely to do worse with his base as well. Poll fluctuations don't mean "things I think are wrong with the sample/methodology." They mean that polls fluctuate. That's what margin of error means.

You're chasing phantoms.

edit: In case you didn't notice, Nate says literally zero things changed today. Don't you think that might suggest this level of freakout is somewhat unwarranted?
 
M

Measley

Junior Member
People are forgetting that the Fox News poll in Ohio showed Obama up by 3 just this past Friday.

Again, we're talking about a state where Romney has NEVER led in the polls.

Consider this; Obama has a better chance of winning Ohio than Romney has of winning Florida. However, the media are saying that Florida leans Romney, and that it's a lost cause for Obama. Also early voting in Ohio has been going on for well over a month now.

You guys need to relax.
 
A

AniHawk

Member
Measley said:
People are forgetting that the Fox News poll in Ohio showed Obama up by 3 just this past Friday.

Again, we're talking about a state where Romney has NEVER led in the polls.

Consider this; Obama has a better chance of winning Ohio than Romney has of winning Florida. However, the media are saying that Florida leans Romney, and that it's a lost cause for Obama. Also early voting in Ohio has been going on for well over a month now.

You guys need to relax.
Click to expand...

i just need romney to start leading in election day voters by 10-15 points instead of 15-20, and i'll be totally fine.
 
M

Measley

Junior Member
AniHawk said:
i just need romney to start leading in election day voters by 10-15 points instead of 15-20, and i'll be totally fine.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if any of these polls are factoring in Gary Johnson. He's on the ballot here in Ohio, and most states around the country. I've seen a considerable amount of Republicans state that they're voting for him because he's a "true conservative".
 
I

ISOM

Member
To someone who wanted to just come in this thread and read where the polls are without all the negative emotions they would run backwards out of this thread because of some people here.
 
H

human5892

Queen of Denmark
I love to lurk me some PoliGAF, but this thread is getting unbearable. Diablos et al: you do realize Obama was never going to win by 5+ points, right? If you're gonna freak out in every Presidential election where your candidate dosen't hold an insurmountable lead at all times, you better quit following this shit right now.

Wake me up when Obama stops holding an aggregate lead (yes, even a small lead is a lead, as much as it hurts our precious little hearts that so many stupid meanies can't see what a dumb jerk Romney is) in the states that really matter. Until then please continue to sob as you cut OHIO into your forearms. Or maybe don't do that as much.
 
T

The Librarian

Banned
I can only imagine the freakout if the poll yesterday came out showing Romney +1, even though a poll on Friday showed Obama +3. I guess that's how Republicans felt about Florida yesterday.
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Everyone needs to go outside and enjoy what little warm weather is left in the year. Maybe it's already gone. In that case, have a hot soothing drink.

It'll be ok.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I feel like everything about my body is denying my current job at this point
19
1K
sono replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
74
5K
k789 replied
Post your backlog list!
2
82
4K
TheDrunkenMerchant replied
[Wired] AI Is Already Taking Jobs in the Video Game Industry
2 3 4 5
216
11K
StereoVsn replied
20 Annoying Stereotypes About Gamers
33
1K
BbMajor7th replied
Top Bottom