• 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 Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)

Status
Not open for further replies.

belvedere

Junior Butler
No clip yet but I did find this.



http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/01/mccain-obama-spar-over-spending-100-years-in-iraq/

“We fought a war with Japan and Germany. Afterwards we maintained a military presence there, which we are doing today. We fought a war in Korea, we maintained a military presence in Korea, which we are doing to this day. The first Gulf War, we threw Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, and we have a military presence there to this day,” McCain told reporters aboard his campaign plane.
 

v1cious

Banned
040108DailyUpdateGraph1_tpn_wdneptr.gif

hmm...
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
terrene said:
Yeah, who could be more sincere than Edwards? My honest opinion is nobody.

please tell me you are joking. That guy allways came off as contrived. Most populists do IMO.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
v1cious said:
i don't buy it. SurveyUSA has her up by 12, and i trust them a lot more.
By either poll, he's gaining. SUSA had Clinton up 19 in their last poll, three weeks ago. Rasmussen has a much worse track record, but they both show him closing the gap. (Though I'm inclined to think the gap is what SUSA shows and not Rasmussen.)
 

terrene

Banned
ToyMachine228 said:
Believe me, McCain's lack of competence will be pretty clear when he's put head to head in a debate against Obama who's very articulate and witty.
Well, Obama got better and better at the debate thing, but it's not really his strongest suit. On the other hand, you are right, he's going to beat the Metamucil out of McCain. I mean, check McCain out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqKaU2fZkAc
 
terrene said:
Well, Obama got better and better at the debate thing, but it's not really his strongest suit. On the other hand, you are right, he's going to beat the Metamucil out of McCain. I mean, check McCain out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqKaU2fZkAc
Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.
 

Azih

Member
Steve Youngblood said:
Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.
Obama's no Kerry dude.
 

terrene

Banned
Steve Youngblood said:
Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.
What they were lucky about was that they were up against the McCain of the left, who's rambling responses lost everybody and made Bush's "one track mind" responses seem coherent.
 
Azih said:
Obama's no Kerry dude.
Or hopefully Al Gore for that matter? I know that Obama isn't as unlikable as Kerry, or as boring as Gore, but I'm just saying that with our current president providing an endless array of late-night comedy fodder for all 8 years of his presidency, I think it's a little naive to go "I can't wait to watch Obama slaughter senile, out-of-touch McCain" as though that's what this general election is going to be about.
 

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
harSon said:
He was questioning why people are enraged with the large increase of oil costs and not produce or milk.

The cost of oil has essentially tripled in the past 10 years.

Has produce risen at equivalent rates?
 

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
So Hillaryis44 is calling Obama the "Real Slim Shady".

Their timing is impeccable.
 

tanod

when is my burrito
GhaleonEB said:
By either poll, he's gaining. SUSA had Clinton up 19 in their last poll, three weeks ago. Rasmussen has a much worse track record, but they both show him closing the gap. (Though I'm inclined to think the gap is what SUSA shows and not Rasmussen.)

IIRC, Rasmussen's polling margin of error is 7%. When you compare that to Gallup's, which is 2%, and a large number of other organizations whose margins of error is considerably lower than Rasmussen's, it puts them firmly in the position of not being all that useful, especially since the contest is so close.

For those who aren't familiar what the margin of error actually means (some statistical knowledge required): A margin of error is a measure of reliability of the polling methodology used. The margin of error indicates that if the polling organization used the exact same methodology to conduct another poll using a different sample of people in the same time period as the original poll, that the second set of results are not likely (~95% chance) to differ more than 2% (the margin of error but I'm using Gallup as an example) from the first set of results.
 

tanod

when is my burrito
Justin Bailey said:
Damn a 37? Really? 37?

How the hell do you do that

1)Only 7 frames.
2)Not having bowled in 30 years.

The last time I bowled was over 5 years ago and before that, almost 3 years. The last time I went bowling I averaged about 85 over 3 10-frame games
 

harSon

Banned
ZealousD said:
The cost of oil has essentially tripled in the past 10 years.

Has produce risen at equivalent rates?

They've had relatively equal increases recently (Both milk and oil have risen 26% according to Beck).
 

GhaleonEB

Member
tanod said:
IIRC, Rasmussen's polling margin of error is 7%. When you compare that to Gallup's, which is 2%, and a large number of other organizations whose margins of error is considerably lower than Rasmussen's, it puts them firmly in the position of not being all that useful, especially since the contest is so close.

For those who aren't familiar what the margin of error actually means (some statistical knowledge required): A margin of error is a measure of reliability of the polling methodology used. The margin of error indicates that if the polling organization used the exact same methodology to conduct another poll using a different sample of people in the same time period as the original poll, that the second set of results are not likely (~95% chance) to differ more than 2% (the margin of error but I'm using Gallup as an example) from the first set of results.
I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.
 

APF

Member
terrene said:
What they were lucky about was that they were up against the McCain of the left, who's rambling responses lost everybody and made Bush's "one track mind" responses seem coherent.
Obama doesn't give rambling responses in debates? He's been awful in the debates, and partly due to his incoherent blabbing. Wolf Blitzer won't always be there to keep the kid on topic.
 
irfan said:
THWACK!!!!!!!!!!!
Yeah! I know! How stupid of me to point out that a candidate's skills to debate articulately really don't have THAT MUCH of an impact to typical voters.

But no, you guys are right. Debates are very important. After all, it was Obama's great performances in the Ohio and Texas debates that allowed him to finally shut the door on Hillary and win those states. Oh wait...
 

gkryhewy

Member
GhaleonEB said:
I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.

People actually thought she'd end up winning by 20% in Pennsylvania?

She couldn't beat hitler by 20%.
 

tanod

when is my burrito
GhaleonEB said:
I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.

Oh, I agree. I just thought a lot of people (not you) don't understand what MoE means. :)
 

TheLegend

Member
typhonsentra said:
I haven't been able to stand Clinton for this entire primary season, but she gets props for that. She can't deliver a "joke" for shit, but (I think) that was an attempt to lighten things up, so you can't put her down for poking fun at herself and Obama. Although claiming it was time for Obama's campaign to get out of the gutter was ridiculous.

He should accept using a Nintendo Wii
Nintendo should sponsor a Wii Sports Bowl-Off.
 
Steve Youngblood said:
Yeah! I know! How stupid of me to point out that a candidate's skills to debate articulately really don't have THAT MUCH of an impact to typical voters.

But no, you guys are right. Debates are very important. After all, it was Obama's great performances in the Ohio and Texas debates that allowed him to finally shut the door on Hillary and win those states. Oh wait...

Steve is right, Kerry CREAMED bush in 2/3 debates, and the third was a draw. Debates can localized effects, but media narrative, is far more important.

Obama has improved substantially as a debater, he went from poor early debates to edging out Clinton in the most recent debates. Still, debates in the modern era of politics don't swing anyone.
 

terrene

Banned
APF said:
Obama doesn't give rambling responses in debates? He's been awful in the debates, and partly due to his incoherent blabbing. Wolf Blitzer won't always be there to keep the kid on topic.
I think that was more true in the beginning than the later debates in TX and OH. He tightened up considerably over time. It is kind of hard to see how McCain v Obama would pan out. McCain gets very blunt and brief when he is feeling testy enough, which is actually very debate-friendly, but he will suddenly go completely out to lunch when he isn't coasting on PTSD-rage or whatever it is. Obama seems to know what he wants to say but constantly self-edits to try and get to the best wording. If he accepts that he might need to be a little "canned" (and I think getting his "lines down" was what tightened him up) I think he'll appear a lot more coherent than McCain a lot of the time.

...Hopefully it doesn't turn into a ramblefest. :/
 

APF

Member
electricpirate said:
Steve is right, Kerry CREAMED bush in 2/3 debates, and the third was a draw. Debates can localized effects, but media narrative, is far more important.

Obama has improved substantially as a debater, he went from poor early debates to edging out Clinton in the most recent debates. Still, debates in the modern era of politics don't swing anyone.
Still, the fallout from a debate can definitely crater your run, stop its momentum, or expose vulnerabilities people otherwise wouldn't have thought were there.


terrene: I think your comment about PTSD is way out of line, but agree with the rest of what you say there
 

harSon

Banned
Could you answer my previous question APF? I'd prefer you to set aside your wittyness and twisting of words when answering. Will anything Obama does short of croaking please you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom