CNN gets it right

[irishScott]

The most balanced, realistic and fair overview of the election I've read to date: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/politics/margin-of-error-campaign-foreman/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

 

[DominionSeraph]

Not really. It is predicated on the false premise that everything is in the candidates' hands, when the American electorate is largely uneducated, stupid, and vote based on vagaries of feeling.

 

[a777pilot]

I did not read it all but I think the picture says it all. Here is an incumbent President and he is only in the game because of an impeached ex-President. Sad.

 

[a777pilot]

Not really. It is predicated on the false premise that everything is in the candidates' hands, when the American electorate is largely uneducated, stupid, and vote based on vagaries of feeling.

On this, I agree.

 

[irishScott]

Not really. It is predicated on the false premise that everything is in the candidates' hands, when the American electorate is largely uneducated, stupid, and vote based on vagaries of feeling.

Actually it addressed that aspect several times.

 

[DominionSeraph]

On this, I agree.

Fuck. Was I really that wrong?

 

[DominionSeraph]

Actually it addressed that aspect several times.

No, it treats the baseline as equal to reach the conclusion that "within the margin of error" is meaningful. But with the economy not instantly, magically fixed like the impatient, self-centered, self-entitled Americans feel they "deserve", they'd unthinkingly vote for anything different on the hope that that change might *poof* them a solution. If Jesus was the incumbent he'd be out on his ass on the specious methodology of, "He had his chance; now it's Romney's turn."

So Obama is better than Jesus. Pretty good, IMO.

 

[irishScott]

No, it treats the baseline as equal to reach the conclusion that "within the margin of error" is meaningful. But with the economy not instantly, magically fixed like the impatient, self-centered, self-entitled Americans feel they "deserve", they'd unthinkingly vote for anything different on the hope that that change might *poof* them a solution. If Jesus was the incumbent he'd be out on his ass on the specious methodology of, "He had his chance; now it's Romney's turn."

So Obama is better than Jesus. Pretty good, IMO.

Ah, so you're saying that people are only voting for Romney because they're stupid. Therefore polls and margins of error are meaningless?

Yeah, that's the kind of response I've come to expect on this forum. It's a credit to the article that you couldn't just come out and say it though.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yes, CNN has become Romney fluffers, and I'm sure he appreciates it.

National polls don't matter in the electoral college system. Battleground state polls matter, a lot, and in that Mitt isn't doing so hot, at all.

The likelihood of an Obama victory, with gains in Congress, looms large, so Righties may as well stay home, get drunk, kick the dog, find somebody to blame other than their own defective belief system.

Blame Christie, OK? Blame Romney for not being "conservative enough". Blame the evil Kenyan voodoo mind control of Obama. Blame anybody but yourselves for being so far off to the right fringe of absolutism that any candidate who has to pander to your wishes can't appeal to enough swing voters to win.

Purge the Repub party of all but the most ardent Teahadists, gun fetishists, misogynists, xenophobes, racists, Tenthers, Libertopians, Fundie-whacks & the lootocrats who exploit you. Then brood about how you can't win, OK?

 

[Abraxas]

Ah, so you're saying that people are only voting for Romney because they're stupid.

I can't speak for Dominion but if you're not a millionaire and you're voting for Romney, I'm saying it.

CNN, like the other news outlets, must perpetuate the myth of the horse race down to the wire because horse races are exciting and it allows them to avoid having to pick a side and risk being wrong. This article is just more in that same tired line of crap.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

It's not just CNN, even MSNBC is declaring this a horse race that will come down to the wire. No media outlet will say what most informed voters know, that Obama has a very high chance of winning this come Tuesday. Why would they intentionally tank/lower their ratings? Makes no sense.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Ah, so you're saying that people are only voting for Romney because they're stupid. Therefore polls and margins of error are meaningless?

I'm saying that the Republicans came in with a massive advantage, making a 50/50 split not an indicator of equal failure.

If we're playing chess, and I'm playing with a handicap of not having my queen, rooks, or bishops, yet I still win 52% of our games, have I failed to dominate you?

 

[irishScott]

I can't speak for Dominion but if you're not a millionaire and you're voting for Romney, I'm saying it.

CNN, like the other news outlets, must perpetuate the myth of the horse race down to the wire because horse races are exciting and it allows them to avoid having to pick a side and risk being wrong. This article is just more in that same tired line of crap.

Well you're entitle to your opinion, and I'm entitled to point out how phenomenally idiotic it is. I pity you if you truly judge people so superficially, that mentality will screw you over quite quickly if applied generally. I guess there are fewer consequences for idiots on the internet.

Alright, so the polls are corrupt, and the mainstream media is corrupt. They're all (in your mind) presenting false images. Well where should we get our information from then?

 

[soccerballtux]

Lol, CNN, the only agency worse than Fox

 

[Abraxas]

Well you're entitle to your opinion, and I'm entitled to point out how phenomenally idiotic it is. I pity you if you truly judge people so superficially, that mentality will screw you over quite quickly if applied generally. I guess there are fewer consequences for idiots on the internet.

Well, how do you define doing something that carries with it deleterious effects for the future of the country and your countrymen with zero good reasons to do so, not even self interest, if not idiotic? That describes the average Romney voter.

Alright, so the polls are corrupt, and the mainstream media is corrupt. They're all (in your mind) presenting false images. Well where should we get our information from then?

Who said the polls are corrupt? I said a lot of the media talking heads are misrepresenting the polls, not that the polls were wrong. Statisticians are reading them very differently, as are people like Vegas odds makers whose livelihood depends on being able to read them accurately. These people all seem to be coming up with a different answer than the media whose drive to pull more viewers into their round the clock election coverage to boost their ratings depends on them saying the race is too close to call. Whats more, those people are all coming up with the same answer about who is ahead with only a little variation in how much.

 

[nextJin]

With the exception of their horrible techs who manage the backend I would say CNN has the most non biased coverage of the big 3.

 

[a777pilot]

Fuck. Was I really that wrong?

ROFLMAO! Now that was funny.

 

[Vic Vega]

The most balanced, realistic and fair overview of the election I've read to date: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/04/politics/margin-of-error-campaign-foreman/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

CNN which went way left in the 90s and stayed that way about ten years has done a lot to move back to a neutral news reporter and save their reputation, I have to give them credit.

 

[Incorruptible]

Yes, CNN has become Romney fluffers, and I'm sure he appreciates it.

National polls don't matter in the electoral college system. Battleground state polls matter, a lot, and in that Mitt isn't doing so hot, at all.

The likelihood of an Obama victory, with gains in Congress, looms large, so Righties may as well stay home, get drunk, kick the dog, find somebody to blame other than their own defective belief system.

Blame Christie, OK? Blame Romney for not being "conservative enough". Blame the evil Kenyan voodoo mind control of Obama. Blame anybody but yourselves for being so far off to the right fringe of absolutism that any candidate who has to pander to your wishes can't appeal to enough swing voters to win.

Purge the Repub party of all but the most ardent Teahadists, gun fetishists, misogynists, xenophobes, racists, Tenthers, Libertopians, Fundie-whacks & the lootocrats who exploit you. Then brood about how you can't win, OK?

Nice partisan hackery

It makes no sense to call the Tea Party jihadists which is an islamic term to describe Christians. Its funny how lefties will call the right ''teahadists'' yet wont dare say anything about islam for fear of being labelled 'islamophobe'. Complete pandering

 

[Jhhnn]

Nice partisan hackery

It makes no sense to call the Tea Party jihadists which is an islamic term to describe Christians. Its funny how lefties will call the right ''teahadists'' yet wont dare say anything about islam for fear of being labelled 'islamophobe'. Complete pandering

It's the same zeal & blind faith driving all extremists, the same rigid thinking.

Definition of Jihad, not what you think it is-

1.
a holy war undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims.
2.
any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jihad

 

[Incorruptible]

It's the same zeal & blind faith driving all extremists, the same rigid thinking.

Definition of Jihad, not what you think it is-



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/jihad

jihad is an islamic term, what is wrong with American Patriots wanting freedom?

You still didn't answer why the left refuses to acknowledge real jihad committed by islamists

 

[Rainsford]

jihad is an islamic term, what is wrong with American Patriots wanting freedom?

Nothing at all, but I don't see how the rest of us are obligated to accept someone else's definition of "patriot" or "freedom"...particularly when they're conveniently applying that definition to themselves and their actions.

You still didn't answer why the left refuses to acknowledge real jihad committed by islamists

If there has been a rash of liberals pretending specific terrorist attacks didn't happen, I must have missed it...

 

[jpeyton]

What CNN doesn't realize is that most recent elections don't have a clear mandate.

In 2008, 59 million people didn't vote for Obama.

In 2004, 59 million people didn't vote for Bush.

In 2000, 51 million people didn't vote for Bush.

In 1996, 47 million people didn't vote for Clinton.

In 1992, 59 million people didn't vote for Clinton.

Guess what, roughly half this country is always going to vote against the winner.

 

[Jhhnn]

jihad is an islamic term, what is wrong with American Patriots wanting freedom?

You still didn't answer why the left refuses to acknowledge real jihad committed by islamists

Nothing at all, but I don't see how the rest of us are obligated to accept someone else's definition of "patriot" or "freedom"...particularly when they're conveniently applying that definition to themselves and their actions.

If there has been a rash of liberals pretending specific terrorist attacks didn't happen, I must have missed it...

I love the deliberately obtuse crap about "freedom", as if that's what Teatards propose at all.

It's also amusing to witness how they arbitrarily choose their own definition of words, even in the face of authoritative sources defining that meaning in terms they reject. It's how we get slogans like "Keep your gubmint hands off my Medicare!"

any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle.

Usually lame-brained ideas, the staple of highly emotional Tea Party zealots.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

1. National polls are meaningless.
2. When you aggregate polls, margin of error goes down. Obama is leading by more than the margin of error in most of the battleground states.