Some polls now have Romney ahead.

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

  1. Engineer

    Engineer Elite Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    37,925
    Likes Received:
    16
    New ABC poll (Obama +3) pushes Obama to a +0.7 lead on average.
     
  2. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bogus "leaked" "internal polls" -- oldest trick in the book.
     
  3. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,505
    Likes Received:
    82
    Nah.

    Rich Beeson, the Political Director for the Romney campaign was on TV yesterday talking about their polling (turnout modeling etc.), the article sounds accurate.

    Again, everyone is modeling turnout differently (at least those that do model) so everyone is getting different results.

    Fern
     
  4. randomrogue

    randomrogue Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    5,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    At this point it's almost impossible for Romney to win unless he cheats. The sheer volume of polling data and polling firms doing the data from both sides show that Romney has almost no chance to win and it's been this way for weeks and trending worse for him.

    I don't understand why anyone would want Romney to win though. That's the scariest thing. It doesn't matter that Obama wins tomorrow, there will still be millions of people who voted for Romney and that says terrible things about the population and values of our country.
     
  5. ivwshane

    ivwshane Lifer

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    17,995
    Likes Received:
    890
    Have you ever heard of a Romney supporter whose reasoning for supporting Romney was because of his policies and not the, "he's not Obama" argument? I haven't.
     
  6. jackstar7

    jackstar7 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,592
    Likes Received:
    369
    You really put it out there.

    Not everyone is willing to say "No idea" and stand by it like that.

    Kudos.



    Vote Obama for a moderate Romney!
     
  7. buckshot24

    buckshot24 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    8,373
    Likes Received:
    52
    I feel the exact opposite. Obama is a disaster and the fact that Romney isn't up by huge numbers is the biggest problem with our country. We're going to have to go broke before we can make the changes we need to make it seems.
     
  8. Phokus

    Phokus Lifer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 1999
    Messages:
    22,304
    Likes Received:
    118
    Interesting post about leaked internal polling:

    http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...14171&perpage=40&pagenumber=260#post409280282

     
  9. ivwshane

    ivwshane Lifer

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    17,995
    Likes Received:
    890
    Id love to hear your definition of "disaster".
     
  10. Charles Kozierok

    Charles Kozierok Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    6,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, bogus non-leaked internal polls.

    There is no way in hell that I believe that Romney's internal polls show him winning. It's pure, unadulterated bullshit.

    And it happens every time, unless the election is truly a laugher.

    A few from 2008:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2121695/posts

    http://swampland.time.com/2008/11/02/mccain-camp-things-are-getting-tight/

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/11/01/mccain-mantains-hope-for-victory/
     
  11. jackstar7

    jackstar7 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Messages:
    7,592
    Likes Received:
    369
    Please do feel encouraged to elaborate on "disaster".
     
  12. hal2kilo

    hal2kilo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    6,519
    Likes Received:
    248
  13. DrewSG3

    DrewSG3 Senior member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    310
    Likes Received:
    1
  14. hal2kilo

    hal2kilo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    6,519
    Likes Received:
    248
    If it was a winner then, no.
     
  15. randomrogue

    randomrogue Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    5,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes but the reason you're saying this is because you're part of the problem. Clearly highly uneducated and unintelligent and a sheep who believes things that Rush Limbaugh tells you. You are unable to make independent decisions or read sources of information that differ from right wing talk radio. When numbers stare you in the face you pretend that they aren't real and make up excuses about how different numbers should be in their place because you "feel" like they should. You use words like "disaster" about Obama when things are better today than they were 4 years ago. I'm not saying Obama is good since I don't believe that at all but "disaster" is a really ignorant thing to say.

    Vote for a 3rd party candidate if you don't like Obama. I'm all for that. Get their numbers higher so they can get some monetary support in 4 years. However voting for a tragic example of a political candidate like Romney is clearly self destructive.
     
  16. Nemesis 1

    Nemesis 1 Lifer

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,379
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tomorrow we will see whos lieing. I went threw the RON paul Thing The Media was 100% behind Romney and the scewed the polls which was clear after delegate counts in a number of states . Now the media is scewing those polls in favor of Obama . Which turns out to be a good thing . Record votes this year. Dead people illegals fixed voting machines . By the time we know who won . Impeachment proceeding will be well underway . The Supreme idiots will declare Romney the winner to spare the nation another impeachment of a low life brainless twat
     
  17. Farang

    Farang Lifer

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2003
    Messages:
    10,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Very interesting to compare, I'd note a losing campaign seems to argue for a tie rather than a lead.

    I wonder if Romney's own people are speaking the truth out loud behind the scenes. Much how, I think around the end of October McCain's people told him he wasn't going to win. I believe this was before the third debate even.
     
  18. ivwshane

    ivwshane Lifer

    Joined:
    May 15, 2000
    Messages:
    17,995
    Likes Received:
    890
  19. PJABBER

    PJABBER Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2001
    Messages:
    4,824
    Likes Received:
    0
  20. Engineer

    Engineer Elite Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    37,925
    Likes Received:
    16
  21. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,505
    Likes Received:
    82
    First thing to look at is voter turnout. There is a lot of disagreement on the right ratio of D's vs. R's.

    If the ratio is the close, unlike many models predicting an Obama win, then a Romney win wouldn't likely be fraud, just an underestimate of R participation in many polls. Given the higher enthusiasm level for the R's it wouldn't be surprising if they were under sampled.

    OTOH, if the D's do have a big turnout advantage yet Obama loses one should be suspicious. It would mean D's voting for Romney.

    A machine can change your vote, but cannot change your party affiliation, so we should know the correct turnout ratio no matter what.

    Fern
     
  22. Atomic Playboy

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    16,440
    Likes Received:
    1
    Do the machines track party affiliation?
     
  23. Screech

    Screech Golden Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,194
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hey Fern,

    I don't know a lot about how these sorts of things are tabulated but am very interested in them -- could you perhaps expand on the above? I'm wondering how it is that the first could be changed but the second could not be.

    Thanks,
    Screech
     
  24. Engineer

    Engineer Elite Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 1999
    Messages:
    37,925
    Likes Received:
    16
    AFAIK, the party affiliation of the voter is not taken by the machine. That would need to be pulled from the voting books and then from the state records, which would be time consuming to say the least.

    Also, why only 39 counties and not all of them? There are 88 counties in Ohio. Wonder what the breakdown of polls in those 39 counties show or how have they voted in the past?

    This smells of corruption....might not be but sure doesn't pass the smell test. Every machine needs to be rolled back and re-certified to the correct, unmodified software, unless there is known bug. In that case, every machine in the state needs to be corrected for the known bug (which I doubt exists).
     
    #1449 Engineer, Nov 5, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2012
  25. Fern

    Fern Elite Member <br> Super Moderator
    Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    26,505
    Likes Received:
    82
    I'm in NC.

    They have manual lists showing who votes, that includes your party affiliation.

    I did early voting. They keyed in a bunch of data, including my name and precinct. Obviously so I can't vote twice. I would imagine that included my party affiliation too.

    I can't remember what they input into the voting machine when I voted on (the regular) election day, but it has never been as much as what they did for early voting.

    Fern