Some polls now have Romney ahead.

Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by Matt1970, Oct 6, 2012.

  1. Thump553

    Thump553 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2000
    Messages:
    9,931
    Likes Received:
    6
    Dems-it makes far more sense to spend your energy volunteering to help get the vote out than arguing over polls-polls which will be irrelevant Wednesday morning regardless.
     
  2. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    The funny thing is I'm not the one with the attitude that the other side can't be right. I've said again and again that Romney loses if the turnout is like the polls have been projecting. I've given reasons why this might not be the case and I get insulted.

    One thing is for sure I'll be gone shortly after the election, just long enough to take my lumps or rub it in.
     
    #1152 buckshot24, Nov 3, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2012
  3. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,077
    Likes Received:
    159
    You're just here to shill for Team Republican, huh?

    How's it pay, anyhow?

    Insulted? You've insulted everybody's intelligence since you joined, so just think of it as retribution.

    I think they're taking reservations for Wahmbulances on Nov 6- you probably want one.
     
  4. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    See what I mean?

    Some of you fuckers are pathetic.

    I've lost money posting here which is pretty stupid I guess.
     
  5. Jhhnn

    Jhhnn Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 1999
    Messages:
    31,077
    Likes Received:
    159
    Heh. Karma- it's a bitch, huh?

    One of the more amusing things about this forum is all the Righties spouting off about work ethic, lazy welfare recipients, moochers, freeloaders & cheaters are obviously posting from work...

    Righties fail at introspection...

    If I'm posting during business hours, it's because I have a day off...
     
  6. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    Don't get me wrong I'm sure I make more money than you even during a slow period. I'm not worried about money at all because I kick ass.

    I make money directly by my efforts not by some wage a company pays me. I'm a capitalist.
     
  7. abaez

    abaez Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2000
    Messages:
    7,155
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. TraumaRN

    TraumaRN Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Regarding conspiracy. It what you are implying. You've been screaming about the polls being all biased against Romney for the past couple weeks. Ergo you think all the pollsters are out to get Romney by boosting numbers for Obama.

    Regarding Rasmussen. You danced right around my point. He doesn't call cell phones. That's a HUGE issue. This is 2012. At least 25% of all Americans, myself included, have only a cell phone. Rasmussen does not call these people. That means he's not accurately sampling 1/4 of the USA. That is a huge problem for any poll. His polls are essentially bullshit to me(and many others) until he makes the effort to call cell phone voters. Period.

    Look at the swing state polls over the couple days. Obama leads in the vast majority of them. Romney does not. From past election cycle we can see its more likely at this point Obama is reelected. Simple as that.
     
  9. Doppel

    Doppel Lifer

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,313
    Likes Received:
    1
    You sound alpha, like Alkemyst :)
     
  10. Rainsford

    Rainsford Lifer

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    17,521
    Likes Received:
    0
    538 accounts for all of what you're saying, which is why Romney has a non-zero chance of winning (one reason I like 538 over other poll aggregation sites). Silver's argument is that the reason Romney's chance isn't higher is that the probability is pretty low for the data being far enough off from the electoral result to result in a Romney win. His argument isn't a strawman at all, he's supporting the idea that the data bias necessary for a Romney victory isn't very likely...but it could still happen.
     
  11. uclaLabrat

    uclaLabrat Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    3,862
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't worry, still spouting the same BS at the place that shall not be named
     
  12. Engineer

    Engineer Elite Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    37,909
    Likes Received:
    3
    Based on the profane language in the posts (I can only see them via somebody quoting it :p ), sounds more like spidey has another accoun......er.....spidey has a twin out there.
     
  13. Bowfinger

    Bowfinger Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2002
    Messages:
    15,341
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lulz. Your credibility just keeps dropping.
     
  14. OneOfTheseDays

    OneOfTheseDays Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2000
    Messages:
    7,052
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aggregate polling sites like 538/RCP tend to have pretty good track records. I think both are showing the pulse of this election quite well and all signs point towards a moderate victory for Obama.

    Could Romney win? Sure. But I wouldn't want to take that bet.
     
  15. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    Polling could be biased and not a conspiracy. I have never mentioned anything of the sort. You're working on assumption and you're fucking up.
    How did I dance around the issue? I granted you 5 points and you're boy would still be fucked. Are you saying he's biased by more than 5 points? Where is your evidence?
    Yes, if turnout is as those polls are showing in their samples. Who's arguing against that? If turnout is accurately portrayed in the polls then Romney loses.
     
  16. Moonbeam

    Moonbeam Elite Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 1999
    Messages:
    57,831
    Likes Received:
    22
    As an observer to this thread who knows nothing perhaps I'm too easily impressed, but in my opinion buckshot did what few conservatives do, argue his points with logical reasoning. He didn't seem to me to insist that he was right but only under certain conditions he could be. I didn't see an absolutist who knows he knows the truth because he feels it in his gut, but a person expressing his opinion. I see he took a lot of insults and returned them too, as I think politics and ego get attached, but his basic arguments, as far as I could understand them didn't upset me. That may be in part because I don't pay too much attention to polls since the one truth that will matter will be known on election day.
     
  17. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    His representation of the argument isn't accurate. Nobody (as far as I can tell) is saying that historically the polls favor the Democrats. He's debunking a claim that nobody is making. It's a perfect example of a strawman.
     
  18. TraumaRN

    TraumaRN Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    6,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Enough with the personal attacks and nasty attitude. If you wonder why people treat you poorly around here that might be why. We are all adults here. Act like it.

    Regarding granting me 5 point and him still losing. I doubt that. And I never said he's more biased. I said its a poll that has poor credibility because they don't call 1/4 of the country Rasmussen has it tied nationally at 48-48 today. If you grant Obama plus 2.5% it becomes 50.5-48. Nearly the exact margin Nate Silver is calling for nationally.

    And thank you for admitting that as of right now based on polling Romney loses.
     
  19. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    I haven't personally attacked you as far as I know. If I have, I'm sorry.

    But you're making assumptions and as the saying goes that assumption is the mother of all fuckups.
    Sigh, I'm not talking about his national tracking poll. I'm talking about his party identification poll. The latest has a spread of 2.6% in favor Republicans. Assuming the worst about that poll and it's really a 2.5% in favor of Democrats on election day Obama would still lose because of the Independent advantage Romney has.

    The question is, who is going to show up to vote next tuesday (or have already voted)?
     
  20. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
  21. First

    First Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    9,759
    Likes Received:
    6
    Oh oh, I want to know, I've always wondered what happened to that sad soul.
     
  22. First

    First Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    9,759
    Likes Received:
    6
    Btw, statistically there's no such thing as normal if the electorate is constantly changing, morphing. Which is why you poll as widely as you can to determine who's coming to the polls in a particular year; i.e. use standard CV methods to get both land lines and cell phones, party identification, etc. as accurately as possible with no human error being introduced. In the USA's case, it's constantly morphing into a more ethnically diverse voting population, which favors one party far more than the other.

    Those poor souls extrapolating House races will be shown on Tuesday why they were wrong to do so, as there is far less diverse and focused polling in those races with well over 1000 different candidates as compared to a Presidential election, with only two candidates of course. You couldn't honestly make a worse comparison and it's why no pollster, even ones as biased as, say, Rasmussen, would seriously compare these two disparate types of elections. Of course, you actually need to understand statistics in the first place, so that's likely where the confusion comes into play.
     
  23. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,195
    Likes Received:
    1
    The only reason the midterms are even mentioned is to show the party turnout.

    Over the years in midterms or presidential the turnout among Democrats and Republicans have been pretty "static" as in there hasn't been huge advantages for one or the other in most years. 2008 is more of an "outlier" than it is the norm.

    There is no extrapolating 2010 going on in any case. I'm talking about polls taken this year about party affiliation.

    I also feel that some of these likely voter screens may be an issue. Some polls have 98% of registered voters being counted as likely voters which is just absurd.
     
  24. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scott Rasmussen is my shepherd; I shall not want.

    He maketh fine polls that showeth my man winning; he leadeth me past polls I dislike.

    He restoreth my political hope; he leadeth me in the paths of right-leaningness for his name's sake.

    Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of math I will fear no evil: for his bias is with me; his distorted sampling doth comfort me.

    He preparest a table before me in the presence of Fox and Friends; he anointest my head with propaganda; my cup runneth over.

    Surely Republican victory shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of Ailes for ever.