• 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 Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gaborn

Member
TDG said:
Just based on everything we know about the state's voting history and such, people will tend to dismiss certain polls. It has nothing to do with not wanting things to be real. Obama losing Penn, Minnesota, or New Mexico just seems unreasonable, and I refuse to believe any poll that says otherwise. It's just like I (and many others) tend to dismiss polls that have Obama up in Florida.

First, the poll in question does NOT say Obama's losing Penn, it says it's tied. Consistently Pennsylvania has been within the margin of error in most polls and it's been considered a toss up state for a while. New Mexico is probably going blue but a poll showing a tie today shouldn't be a shock either. Minnesota... will go blue, without much question. It's simply not as in play as the other two.
 

gcubed

Member
quick question, did we ever get those new registration tables that someone was going to post?

My question is... say 2/3rds of new registrations show up to the polls and vote down party lines (very unlikely to be that high, but i am trying to frame my question), or say that minorities and/or the youth vote is much higher then expected, how many percentage points can that mess up a "likely voters" poll?
 

Miroku

Member
Cloudy said:
I love how Fox is determined to smear Obama with this bogus NY Post story. No other serious media is carrying it but them :lol

That's because all other media is Liberal and not FAIR & BALANCED. Get with the program dude.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Y2Kev said:
A few things:

--I didn't know about NM. It's sure to go blue?

and

--Still, when people say he hasn't found a path to 270...he has...didn't bush run the table?
Here's the Pollster trendline:

08NMPresGEMvO600.png


On average, Obama has been ahead since February.

Bush did run the table on swing states. Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico by <2% each; Ohio by 2%, Colorado and Florida by 5%, Virginia by nine. This year, all of those are even closer, and in most Dems have huge gains in voter registration. Plus, Obama has several realistic combinations to get over the hump. He can win without Florida or Ohio; Kerry couldn't.
 
Freedom = $1.05 said:
I don't see him winning here either, honestly. And I've gone canvassing for the man so I say this as I toke on some hopium *puff puff*

Sadly I agree. And I also tend to dismiss polls that tend to lie against common sense or go against political history unless there is some demographic shift in place. I never believed North Dakota was close for instance despite earlier poll dated that suggested it was. There is no obligation in a political thread to surrender all logic to polls at any given moment unless it's the last day and even then those can be very wrong. See 2004.
 

TDG

Banned
Gaborn said:
First, the poll in question does NOT say Obama's losing Penn, it says it's tied. Consistently Pennsylvania has been within the margin of error in most polls and it's been considered a toss up state for a while. New Mexico is probably going blue but a poll showing a tie today shouldn't be a shock either. Minnesota... will go blue, without much question. It's simply not as in play as the other two.
I know the poll doesn't say Obama's losing, but Door2Dawn said "fuck that poll" (which isn't even trying to discredit it, it's just saying the poll shouldn't be paid attention to) because Obama's going to win Pennsylvania. If Obama doesn't win Penn, he loses Penn. There's only one alternative.

All I was saying was that it's not fair to say that D2D was saying it's not true because he doesn't want it to be true, when he could simply believe that regardless of what polls say, Obama will win Penn. Just like how I argued that my home state (Ohio) would go for McCain, even when polls showed otherwise. I wasn't rejecting the polls because I didn't want them to be true (I'd love for Ohio to go for Obama), I was rejecting it because I don't think they will be true.
 

mclem

Member
AniHawk said:
Yeah, and at the end of his speech he finished with, "and THAT'S the kind of change we need." Jon Stewart made a point about it.

The nasal laugh and scary grin makes me laugh thinking back on it.

I... I didn't make it to the end. Can you blame me?
 
Tamanon said:
Whoa. Just saw the Brave New PAC commercial during Hardball. The one with one of his fellow POWs saying he doesn't want McCain near the button.
Yes!! Swift Boat McCain and give the Repugnant party a taste of their own medicine.
 

Gaborn

Member
polyh3dron said:
Yes!! Swift Boat McCain and give the Repugnant party a taste of their own medicine.

But... Ronito said only Conservatives name-call! so... I didn't know you were voting for McCain
 

TreIII

Member
GhaleonEB said:
Bush did run the table on swing states. Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico by <2% each; Ohio by 2%, Colorado and Florida by 5%, Virginia by nine. This year, all of those are even closer, and in most Dems have huge gains in voter registration. Plus, Obama has several realistic combinations to get over the hump. He can win without Florida or Ohio; Kerry couldn't.

And this, is what is really what the story is looking to be.

Hell, even Ohio is probably in play, if those new college voters and advance registration in the next few weeks comes through as the Dems hope they do.
 

Rur0ni

Member
Zeliard said:
Chris Matthews is destroying yet another GOP blowhard. It's endlessly amusing when they get caught up in their own bullshit.
That was one of McCain senior advisors... Nancy pftheimerfuhfkasdfh-something. Massive fail.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
And bear in mind Kerry only won PA by three points. Democratic registrations have me believing it won't be that close this year, but it wasn't exactly a blowout last time.
 

TDG

Banned
ArtG said:
*Shakes head*
Look dude, if you liked the result of the 2004 election, that's your problem. These days, a campaign's gotta do what a campaign's gotta do. Being nice and talking about the issues and respecting your opponent's honor doesn't get you dick if (a.k.a. when) you lose the election, except it gives the other party the idea that your party should be pushed around in this manner more often.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
TreIII said:
And this, is what is really what the story is looking to be.

Hell, even Ohio is probably in play, if those new college voters and advance registration in the next few weeks comes through as the Dems hope they do.
Yeah, I want to see the numbers that flood in during the early registration/voting window. If ~100k make it in there, I think Obama has a real shot in OH.

But outside that, I still think holding the Kerry states, and then winning Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado will be the most likely combination. If he wins Ohio, he wins Virginia and then it's not even close.
 

Gaborn

Member
polyh3dron said:
Come on, we all know he's gonna vote for Babar.

So since Ronito's always right are you voting for *shudder* McCain, or Barr?

Ronito - Ok, so maybe you're not always right :lol :lol :lol
 

ArtG

Member
TDG said:
Look dude, if you liked the result of the 2004 election, that's your problem. These days, a campaign's gotta do what a campaign's gotta do. Being nice and talking about the issues and respecting your opponent's honor doesn't get you dick if (a.k.a. when) you lose the election, except it gives the other party the idea that your party should be pushed around in this manner more often.

If the end justifies the means, sure. I personally cannot subscribe to it.
 

Xisiqomelir

Member
TDG said:
Look dude, if you liked the result of the 2004 election, that's your problem. These days, a campaign's gotta do what a campaign's gotta do. Being nice and talking about the issues and respecting your opponent's honor doesn't get you dick if (a.k.a. when) you lose the election, except it gives the other party the idea that your party should be pushed around in this manner more often.

Correct. The RNC cannot pretend it is any sort of respectable organization while pumping out such utter tripe as the sex ed ad. They can cry about it if they want, but they have an 8-year backlog of fucking this country over to work through before most reasonable people will regard them as any kind of alternative to sane governance again.
 

Gaborn

Member
thekad said:
What's your definition if "toss-up?"

Within 5% points or the margin of error at this point. As we get closer to the election I'd simply say within the MOE

Ronito - ummmmmm... no. Two different basic philosophies. Greens and Libertarians are roughly as ideologically opposed as Democrats and Republicans.
 

ronito

Member
Gaborn said:
Ronito - ummmmmm... no. Two different basic philosophies. Greens and Libertarians are roughly as ideologically opposed as Democrats and Republicans.
To be fair (TM), that would matter if I were being serious.
 
Gaborn said:
So since Ronito's always right are you voting for *shudder* McCain, or Barr?

Ronito - Ok, so maybe you're not always right :lol :lol :lol
I'm not yet an American citizen so I can't vote, but if I could I'd vote Obama, not that it'd matter since I live in CA.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom