• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

ViperVisor

Member
Even TYT is trying out Diablosing about polls that include Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in Ohio. Ralph Nader + Babar got 1% combined in 2008 and Obama won by 4.6%. But somehow they're going to magically get 5% tomorrow.
 
E

eBay Huckster

Member
got a fairly long exam on climate change tomorrow (and a microecon assignment regarding short-run production due about 4 hours later)

then i'm off to my apartment to get plastered with friends
 
A

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
i_am_not_jon_ames said:
As a left leaning person that prefers an Obama victory, are you guys REALLY that confident that all these state polls will hold?
Click to expand...

If you aren't nervous, you don't care. But NONE of the polling aggregates show Romney winning. Its difficult to conceive of Romney winning a state he's never led in ever.

"Could not be closer" would be if every state was safe Obama/Romney except Florida, which is where it is right now.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Angry Grimace said:
If you aren't nervous, you don't care. But NONE of the polling aggregates show Romney winning. Its difficult to conceive of Romney winning a state he's never led in ever.

"Could not be closer" would be if every state was safe Obama/Romney except Florida, which is where it is right now.
Click to expand...

Pretty much how I feel. I'm supremely confident in Silver and Wang's models and the accuracy of the state polling aggregates, but at the same time, I'm nervous as hell. The 'what ifs' are eating away at me when my rational self knows that it shouldn't be a problem. All in all, I just want this over.
 
B

Byakuya769

Member
speculawyer said:
Ejtnq.jpg
Click to expand...
More like "Inward."
 
E

electricpirate

Member
Angry Grimace said:
If you aren't nervous, you don't care. But NONE of the polling aggregates show Romney winning. Its difficult to conceive of Romney winning a state he's never led in ever.

"Could not be closer" would be if every state was safe Obama/Romney except Florida, which is where it is right now.
Click to expand...

"See you don't understand, while the toplines of polling is severely skewed, but you have to dig into poll internals,where we say unskews voter opinions where we see Romney has double digit leads with independants and on his handling of the economy. For that reason, I predict Romney wins with 320+ EV."

Or some such crap that comes up on my facebook.
 
C

CygnusXS

will gain confidence one day
Bowdz said:
Pretty much how I feel. I'm supremely confident in Silver and Wang's models and the accuracy of the state polling aggregates, but at the same time, I'm nervous as hell. The 'what ifs' are eating away at me when my rational self knows that it shouldn't be a problem. All in all, I just want this over.
Click to expand...

What makes me nervous is worrying about the voter suppression issues in Ohio, Florida, and Colorado. Because if those all go red due to shenanigans, and Romney overperforms in VA enough to flip it... there goes the election.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
T

thezerofire

Banned
Suikoguy said:
Programming Exam myself, not worried about it though.
Click to expand...
this professor is really bad, he's already said the test is really hard, our TA had trouble finishing it in the allotted time, and it doesn't start til 5 pm. It's not going to go well. At least I have the election results and halo 4 to look forward to after
 
K

Krowley

Member
Is there any chance that the Dick Morris assertion is accurate? Are these state polls really assuming 2008 levels of voter enthusiasm for President Obama in their turnout models? Because they're not going to get that, if it is really true. I know there was an article debunking his line of reasoning, but I can't seem to find it at the moment.

Also, what about the argument that if an incumbent is polling below 50% he is destined to lose? I've always thought that made a lot of sense. Undecideds tend to break against an incumbent.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Krowley said:
Is there any chance that the Dick Morris assertion is accurate? Are these state polls really assuming 2008 levels of voter enthusiasm for President Obama in their turnout models? Because they're not going to get that, if it is really true. I know there was an article debunking his line of reasoning, but I can't seem to find it at the moment.

Also, what about the argument that if an incumbent is polling below 50% he is destined to lose? I've always thought that made a lot of sense. Undecideds tend to break against an incumbent.
Click to expand...

There is zero chance anything Dick Morris said is based in fact
 
A

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
electricpirate said:
"See you don't understand, while the toplines of polling is severely skewed, but you have to dig into poll internals,where we say unskews voter opinions where we see Romney has double digit leads with independants and on his handling of the economy. For that reason, I predict Romney wins with 320+ EV."

Or some such crap that comes up on my facebook.
Click to expand...

I misspoke anyways. I meant none of the individual polls, much less the polling aggregate.
 
T

titiklabingapat

Member
Krowley said:
Is there any chance that the Dick Morris assertion is accurate? Are these state polls really assuming 2008 levels of voter enthusiasm for President Obama in their turnout models? Because they're not going to get that, if it is really true. I know there was an article debunking his line of reasoning, but I can't seem to find it at the moment.

Also, what about the argument that if an incumbent is polling below 50% he is destined to lose? I've always thought that made a lot of sense. Undecideds tend to break against an incumbent.
Click to expand...

Enthusiasm levels and party ID are not weighted by most reputable pollsters. The party ID and enthusiasm levels you see in the polls are what's being reported by the people being polled themselves weighed by less fluid demographics aspects such as race/gender/age, etc.

Undecideds do NOT tend to break against the incumbent, no.
 
B

bodyofanamerican

Member
Krowley said:
Is there any chance that the Dick Morris assertion is accurate? Are these state polls really assuming 2008 levels of voter enthusiasm for President Obama in their turnout models? Because they're not going to get that, if it is really true. I know there was an article debunking his line of reasoning, but I can't seem to find it at the moment.

Also, what about the argument that if an incumbent is polling below 50% he is destined to lose? I've always thought that made a lot of sense. Undecideds tend to break against an incumbent.
Click to expand...
Don't worry. Andrew Sullivan (blogger on the Daily Beast) didn't name his award for staggeringly wrong predictions the Dick Morris award for nothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom