I remember GAF in 2004 went nuts because zogby kept showing strong polls for Kerry and we believed them hook line and sinker. Hurts just thinking about it.
-
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.
PolliGaf 2012 |OT5| Big Bird, Binders, Bayonets, Bad News and Benghazi
- Thread starter RustyNails
- Start date
- Status
cartoon_soldier
Member
was just gonna say, i'm mainly trolling because i think the election is over and has been for a long time. just exploiting a rich market. and i think it's pretty easy to separate my troll posts from normal ones.
I feel like the NE GOP is in a very much hold your nose and vote for him type of voter. A lot of people near me that are voting for Romney think Ryan is one small step above Palin and Romney is a coward but... Spending!
Oh, I know this completely.
It's still amusing, though.
Sam Wang gives Obama +5 in EV since last night. At 310 now. Love it.
Hopium! Step right up and get yer hopium!
It's pretty interesting how Silver, the more conservative prediction, has Obama doing good in Virginia and Sam has it as a tossup.
edit: Heh, and Obama gained 5 EVs overnight in Sam's model.
Sam's model has it as tossup if no candidate has 60+%.
Nate's model has Virginia only 61% for Obama, so it's not that far off from each other.
I think the bigger discrepancy is Sam has NC as tossup, while Nate has it as 80+% for Romney.
But the trend I've noticed is that when Sam's model made big electoral jumps, like it did this morning, 538 usually goes up, by a more modest amount within the next day or two.
Make your bets. Who will be more accurate this year, Wang or Silver?
I'm going with Wang as well, because he is so goddamn bold with his predictions. Although their electorate models are pretty similar so far, imo.
98% chance of victory. Yes, please.
Officerrob
Banned
So RCP just added a new Virginia poll that screwed-up their average.
Roanoke College poll: 49R-44O.
As someone who lives in Roanoke, and who's mother-in-law works at Roanoke College, they really need to stop doing polls. Look at this crap:
Northern VA: Obama 45, Romney 47. Obama is going to win the north handily.
Southwest VA: Obama 40%, Obama 40%. Obama is going to get destroyed here in the southwest. I'm an Obama campaign volunteer here in Roanoke, he's going to get crushed in the southwest, just like 2008
Then there is this gem:
Any screen you use that shows Romney with a 13 point lead is complete bullshit
Roanoke College poll: 49R-44O.
As someone who lives in Roanoke, and who's mother-in-law works at Roanoke College, they really need to stop doing polls. Look at this crap:
Northern VA: Obama 45, Romney 47. Obama is going to win the north handily.
Southwest VA: Obama 40%, Obama 40%. Obama is going to get destroyed here in the southwest. I'm an Obama campaign volunteer here in Roanoke, he's going to get crushed in the southwest, just like 2008
Then there is this gem:
Any screen you use that shows Romney with a 13 point lead is complete bullshit
Fragamemnon
Member
I don't call polls terrible very often-mostly they are useful as data points to be compared with other data points-but that Roanoke College poll is just terrible. There's no way Obama loses Northern VA, and the only way he even comes close in SW VA is if the snow there turns into solid ice for a good week. And even then he still loses there.
Can I request a moratorium of this sort of talk? Please?
Do you seriously want to invoke the wrath of whatever from high atop the thing?
LOL, which countries are those?
Officerrob
Banned
Roanoke College is complete crap. They released a poll on October 8th, look at one of the cross tabs of the earlier poll:
Southwest VA: Obama 31, Romney 44. So their story is Obama gained 9 points while Romney lost four points in southwest Virginia (a region Obama is going to get crushed in), while going from and eight point lead in the state to down five? Get the fuck out of here
Wafflecakes
Member
Very very few.
When the dust settles. Everything will look just about how it does now.
2014 looks scary.
BertramCooper
Banned
Though maybe, just maybe, a solid presidential loss will dispirit House Republicans enough to get them to cut back on the stonewalling.
There's far less incentive to sabotage a second-term president than a first-term one. Eventually you reach the point where you're just sabotaging your own party.
Fragamemnon
Member
Poster is probably referring to Scanadavian countries and other European style social democracies. Not really socialist countries by absolute standards, but definitely rat bastard communists by Hannity standards.
Very unlikely. The Congressional GOP will only talk if put under extreme duress from their donor base.
Officerrob
Banned
Dumping money into Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota the last week of the election while not actually campaigning there equals throwing darts with your eyes closed while crossing your fingers
At this point, I'm convinced that the Dems will come within an asshair of the House, but just shy. On the bright side, it will force the House GOP into some really uncomfortable positions, many of which will require near-impossible party discipline..
I'm still thinking that the Grand Showcase Prize in this showdown comes from changing the Senate filibuster rules - allowing Obama to flood the Judiciary with young, healthy, liberal judges. That'll leave a mark on government for a long, long time; it'll be 2050 and beyond, and we'll still be cheering the rulings written by his judges.
I'm still thinking that the Grand Showcase Prize in this showdown comes from changing the Senate filibuster rules - allowing Obama to flood the Judiciary with young, healthy, liberal judges. That'll leave a mark on government for a long, long time; it'll be 2050 and beyond, and we'll still be cheering the rulings written by his judges.
Wafflecakes
Member
Yeah it will be rough.
Better to have another republican wave in 2014 while dems have the presidency than to have one 2016 though. (assuming Obama wins)
Mgoblue201
Won't stop picking the right nation
Is that due to all the media coverage? I have to say that some journalists and pundits, by picking a fight, are simply going to drive interest in the 538 model if Nate Silver is at all correct. That may not hurt the party hacks who are more interested in manufacturing outrage or telling their base what its wants to hear, but it will make some pundits look stupid.
RustyNails
Member
I love the smell of hopium in the morning
BertramCooper
Banned
If the economic recovery accelerates - and I think it probably will to some degree - I don't see 2014 being all that bleak.
If the GOP can't manage to defeat an incredibly vulnerable incumbent like Obama or regain the Senate, you have to think that the party will do some serious soul-searching about their messaging.
If the GOP can't manage to defeat an incredibly vulnerable incumbent like Obama or regain the Senate, you have to think that the party will do some serious soul-searching about their messaging.
Fragamemnon
Member
I think it's more like the gif of the arab guy throwing money in the casino. Romney's got spare cash and just is looking to put it to work quickly somewhere relevant, no matter how remote.
I don't trust the Senate to actually reform itself. Many Senators value the stature and traditions of the Senate much more than the actual legislative effectiveness of the body. A circle jerk of the very worst order, if you will.
Something I don't understand is that the "Jewish conspiracy/Illuminati" people also tend to be the "Israel is our closest ally" people. Do they simultaneously hate/love Jews?
Bad news for Barry, he better not lose
exactly, the media is really screwing themselves. If he is as accurate as he was in 2008 they are screwed because there is so much undue focus on him people will go "hmm, who needs pundits when this guy can do it consistently"
There's just no evidence for this. This people are insane, especially some of the major donors. Only a complete landslide and donor crisis is going to cause the kind of soul searching that Democrats actually want Republicans to do.
At BEST we might get less obstructionism. I put chance of that at 1%.
I posted about this yesterday. It's a feedback loop. Media complaints about Nate -> Nate gets more traffic -> Spillover to other sites like Sam Wang, who has recently commented that his hits are through the roof -> media complains more about Nate -> Nate gets more traffic
The media should just IGNORE that. They ignore reality on every other subject. Why do they have to start addressing it now?
The Fundamentalists currently dancing around in the skin of the Republican Party will just take it as they weren't "pure" enough, and will just even harder right. And since they're fairly quick to eat their own young and make them stand on the party line, the chances of a moderate or liberal Republican rising up out of the ranks and telling the crazies to GTFO is very slim.
Not even their presidential candidate, who should technically be a moderate Republican and doesn't even have to worry about being a Senator and the effects thereof, will stand up to them.
No amount of SuperPACs can save a horrible candidate apparently. Romney's campaign was moderately well run, but Romney the man comes off as a total slime ball. Romney's non-stop flip-flop pandering, outright lies, and lack of understanding of what it's like not to have always been a millionaire makes him too unlikable. I'm pretty sure even the most racist and right wing extremist end of the Tea Party doesn't actually like Romney, they are only voting for him because he's the Republican not-Obama.
darkside31337
Tomodachi wa Mahou
Yeah no. They will see it as a message that they need to go further to the right, that their attempts at obstruction weren't effective enough and they need to try harder.
Rural areas are more religious. Republicans pander more to religious extremists.
Not only that, but with the advent of the DVR, even average Joe can skip commercials now.
The debates require an interested and active viewer. The debates were seen by more than any TV show in the USA. It's like a 90 minute political advertisement that switches between candidates with attentive viewers. That massively outweighs 30 second attack ads that can be fast forwarded.
We're nt really going to know until afterwards, but I think Chait is right -- the GOP is already making compromise noises to avoid the fiscal cliff, which happens to secretly be a deficit solution wayyyyyyy to the left of anything you could get passed in America. Once we get a bipartisan bill that raises taxes on the wealthy, what are they gonna do? You can't be a little bit forsworn. It'll be time to start reeling it in.
BertramCooper
Banned
There are quite a few powerful GOP donors - David Koch, for instance - who are quite a bit more liberal than the current GOP establishment on social issues. I don't think we'll see the GOP embrace issues like same-sex marriage, but I think we'll at least see them soften their rhetoric on them.
I do think the GOP will soon realize that the demographics of the country are turning against them. Conservatism in the U.S. always drags its feet, but it manages to progress at the slowest possible rate to remain relevant.
it will be bleak, just not the assdrubbing of 2010. afterall, the midterm election of a twoterm prez historically isn't favorable to the in party.
re: silver. if his model was showing a near 50/50 split, you can bet the media would have his 538 forecast graphic plastered during every news segment.
If I recall correctly, there used to be blowouts pretty much all the time. Even as recent as Reagan/Mondale, which was 525-13.
It's no Reagan/Mondale.
For this new era of division, that's about as large a mandate as one could ever hope for. It was such a huge victory.
Found a handy "box score" for every election:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/scores.html#1789
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/scores.html#1789
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked