|
Discussion: Nate Silver predicted election 100% right
Member Since: 10/29/2010
Posts: 29,249
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
Give me numbers out of Ohio that show me to be lying.
|
The Democrats were on pace to outnumber their 2008 numbers. Did you hear about Sandy? Or the Secretary of State cutting early voting and ending it on Saturday because they know African Americans will come out to vote on Sunday? At the end of the day it will come down to ground game, Obama has more volunteers, I mean 150 field offices vs. 40-something for Romney. They'll be more effective in getting their voters out.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/15/2011
Posts: 4,670
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
Yet in the states that matter, Romney is doing better with Early voting as opposed to 2008 and Obama is doing much worse than 2008. And Romney is leading with people who plan to vote tomorrow.
|
No. Have you seen any coverage lately? It has shown Democrates are leading early voting in key battle ground states.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Onen
So is romney AHEAD in ohio or is he simply "closing the gap" ?
Because a lot can change in between now and tuesday.
|
He's closing the gap. Most (99%) of polls show Obama ahead but out of that 99%, 80% are within the margin of error
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2010
Posts: 51,088
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
Give me numbers out of Ohio that show me to be lying.
|
The numbers posted in the OP, darling.
Besides, Romney lost Ohio when he continued to lie in his recent campaigning about a THIRD PARTY (not even President Obama): the auto industry. He literally continued it over-and-over-and-over, rather than just accept the fact that he made up a bunch of malarkey.
Ohioans know the auto industry very, very well and they don't take kindly to flat-out lies (sending jobs to China, etc).
He also lost Ohio, Virginia, and possibly even Florida when Sandy happened.
Electorally, it's over for Mr. Romney.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BoyOnBoy Wonder
The numbers posted in the OP, darling.
Besides, Romney lost Ohio when he continued to lie in his recent campaigning about a THIRD PARTY (not even President Obama): the auto industry.
Ohioans know the auto industry very, very well and they don't take kindly to flat-out lies (sending jobs to China, etc).
He also lost Ohio, Virginia, and possibly even Florida when Sandy happened.
Electorally, it's over for Mr. Romney.
|
Most of the most recent polls show Romney ahead in Florida, not sure about that. Ohio and Virgina are in Obama's corner, even if it's 1%
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2011
Posts: 14,331
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Onen
So is romney AHEAD in ohio or is he simply "closing the gap" ?
Because a lot can change in between now and tuesday.
|
Okay lemme give you da data, that can't be refuted.
Obama is leading with early voting. BUT, 155K less democrats have voted early than in 2008. and 111k more republicans have voted than in 2008. That is a 266k vote swing. Obama won the state in 2008 by some 250k votes I believe, correct me if I am wrong as I am sure someone will. And Romney leads with people who plan to vote tomorrow by 10-15 points. People on the ground in Ohio are calling it for Romney. If Ohio goes Romney, so goes the presidency.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/16/2010
Posts: 15,137
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
That doesn't have anything to do with turnout. There were more democrats in 2000 and 2004. And hell if you look at what you sent me, there are virtually always more democrats. But republicans get their people to the polls, 2008 was an exception because no republican wanted to vote for either candidate.
|
You're missing the point. The fact that more Democrats are polled a) is simply a reflection of the populace and b) doesn't necessarily reflect voting trends, as evidenced by the high numbers of Democrats still registered in solidly red states like Georgia. So to dismiss the data that suggests Obama is favored simply because "the polls are biased" is, well, delusional.
Nobody is saying Romney has no shot at winning. But there's nothing to suggest that he's favored, either.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2011
Posts: 195
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
What lies? Have you looked at the samples of these polls showing Obama BARELY winning these states? Once you get rid of the obvious outsampling of democrats, Romney wins nearly every battleground state. I mean...you gurls are in for a very rude awakening.
|
What lies? Gurl, Romney changes his statements and plans more then he changes his underwear. And hence why I said people are being BRAINWASHED by him. But it doesn't matter anyway because the TRUTH shall set you free and Obama is clearly the one who will be set free by these electoral votes to continue on being the president of the United States of America.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 6/19/2011
Posts: 4,250
|
Oh and this is suppose to be more believable than my last thread! Please stop posting all these threads with non-reliable websites!!!
This will be closed soon enough
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2011
Posts: 14,331
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Pauly
No. Have you seen any coverage lately? It has shown Democrates are leading early voting in key battle ground states.
|
You aren't reading. I said as opposed to 2008. And democrats are doing worse than they did in 2008.
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2010
Posts: 51,088
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RatedG²
Most of the most recent polls show Romney ahead in Florida, not sure about that. Ohio and Virgina are in Obama's corner, even if it's 1%
|
That's why I said "even" Florida (as in, it's not a given); Virginia and Ohio are, though.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2011
Posts: 14,331
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Specialist
What lies? Gurl, Romney changes his statements and plans more then he changes his underwear. And hence why I said people are being BRAINWASHED by him. But it doesn't matter anyway because the TRUTH shall set you free and Obama is clearly the one who will be set free by these electoral votes to continue on being the president of the United States of America.
|
You didn't address anything about the polling data.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
Okay lemme give you da data, that can't be refuted.
Obama is leading with early voting. BUT, 155K less democrats have voted early than in 2008. and 111k more republicans have voted than in 2008. That is a 266k vote swing. Obama won the state in 2008 by some 250k votes I believe, correct me if I am wrong as I am sure someone will. And Romney leads with people who plan to vote tomorrow by 10-15 points. People on the ground in Ohio are calling it for Romney. If Ohio goes Romney, so goes the presidency.
|
No.
Romney NEEDS to win Ohio to win the presidency. Obama does not need Ohio to win, as his chances are much stronger realistically, So it's not completely true. I can't really comment about the stats you used since I'm not sure (I will assume they are) so it will be close, but I doubt anyone is calling it for Romney simply because the scientific polls tell a different story
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2010
Posts: 51,088
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
You aren't reading. I said as opposed to 2008. And democrats are doing worse than they did in 2008.
|
What does that matter?
Obama had an overwhelming amount of the electoral votes in 2008.
He can still easily win this election and be doing "worse" than in 2008.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2011
Posts: 14,331
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Benzene
You're missing the point. The fact that more Democrats are polled a) is simply a reflection of the populace and b) doesn't necessarily reflect voting trends, as evidenced by the high numbers of Democrats still registered in solidly red states like Georgia. So to dismiss the data that suggests Obama is favored simply because "the polls are biased" is, well, delusional.
Nobody is saying Romney has no shot at winning. But there's nothing to suggest that he's favored, either.
|
Yes there are, the polling dats is skewed. I'm not missing any point, you are delusional, not me. To believe these polls that believe turnout will be identical to 2008, it won't happen.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/16/2005
Posts: 16,872
|
Quote:
Originally posted by AlexandraStanFan
Oh and this is suppose to be more believable than my last thread! Please stop posting all these threads with non-reliable websites!!!
This will be closed soon enough
|
You sound pressed. Keep on lurking.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2011
Posts: 14,331
|
Quote:
Originally posted by BoyOnBoy Wonder
What does that matter?
Obama had an overwhelming amount of the electoral votes in 2008.
He can still easily win this election and be doing "worse" than in 2008.
|
It matters a great deal, cause Romney is leading with people who plan to vote tomorrow. He closed the gap with early voting and now he is leading with people who are voting tomorrow, he is going to win.
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2010
Posts: 51,088
|
Quote:
Originally posted by AlexandraStanFan
Oh and this is suppose to be more believable than my last thread! Please stop posting all these threads with non-reliable websites!!!
This will be closed soon enough
|
SCREAMING.
It's the NY Times!
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/3/2010
Posts: 71,871
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
Yes there are, the polling dats is skewed. I'm not missing any point, you are delusional, not me. To believe these polls that believe turnout will be identical to 2008, it won't happen.
|
Well if it weren't for Hurricane Sandy, the turnout would be the same or very similar as 2008
|
|
|
Member Since: 12/21/2010
Posts: 51,088
|
Quote:
Originally posted by itsAllen
It matters a great deal, cause Romney is leading with people who plan to vote tomorrow. He closed the gap with early voting and now he is leading with people who are voting tomorrow, he is going to win.
|
No polls show that though.
He's leading in Virginia and Ohio.
|
|
|
|
|