Romney, Obama, Rasmussen

not_so_new said:
I see that... It's such a shame that we can't really have a serious discussion on the problems we face as a nation. Instead we spend our time defending entrenched positions. We are all guilty of it to some degree but it just feels like there is no gray areas with some people, it's all black or white.

Oh well, I believe I said this earlier in this very thread, we get the government we deserve so we will see how it all shakes out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and it's disappointing that it's so shameless. It's obvious this isn't taken seriously. Quips and insults are not argument but here is a skeptics forum that's what counts for it. Now, let me say that there are those on the left just as bad. People need their equivalency to justify bad behavior.
 
RandFan said:
I'm sorry, simply not comprable to the four Pinocchios, pants on fire ratings Romney routinely gets.
Ok, so now your position is that Obama lies less than Romney? Please do us all a favor and phrase it that way in the future to avoid misunderstandings.

But you aren't really interested in the truth are you?
Click to expand...

I am. That is why I spend time on YEC and Christian boards, and on liberal political boards. You see, I put my own beliefs under scrutiny and try and understand the opposite position. That is why I looked into this forum. However, I gave up on serious discussion here long ago. There isn't any.

Obama has not been on ever side of every position. Obama has not routinely changed positions in a single day. Romney has.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the list of Obama's lies that I posted?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Can this Scottish dude butt in and confess to liking polls as much as the next interested observer.....but isn't it all vanity / meaningless? I mean, yeah, sure - a 15 point deficit is an election loser for sure - but shouldn't bumps be interpreted on state by states?

It's all great when your guy is on top, but is there any real evidence that any recent Romney bump has changed the EC map significantly in favour of a likely chance of victory? Heck, even 50/50 chance?

Alternatively - is the argument that undecideds read the polls and are most likely to pick the leading man in the days just prior to voting day - rendering attractive polls, well........attractive.
 
RandFan said:
Yeah, and it's disappointing that it's so shameless. It's obvious this isn't taken seriously. Quips and insults are not argument but here is a skeptics forum that's what counts for it. Now, let me say that there are those on the left just as bad. People need their equivalency to justify bad behavior.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. People in a polite social situation would never say some of the things they get to say as a faceless nameless poster on a discussion board.

It's not a discussion, it's a chance for most to stick their fingers in their ears and shout "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" at the top of their lungs.
 
sir drinks-a-lot said:
Ok, so now your position is that Obama lies less than Romney? Please do us all a favor and phrase it that way in the future to avoid misunderstandings.
Click to expand...
I've said countless times all politicians lie. Hell, here's a little bit of info for you We all do.

You see, I put my own beliefs under scrutiny and try and understand the opposite position.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that for a second. I really don't.

What does this have to do with the list of Obama's lies that I posted?
Click to expand...
Simple. It demonstrates the degree of dissembling that Romney will engage in compared to Obama. BTW: Your list was in response to Romney's prevarication. Trying to act like I've changed subjects is disingenuous when we were talking about Romney to begin with. I could as easily have asked what does Obama's lies have to do with Romney?
 
Last edited:
malicus said:
Can this Scottish dude butt in and confess to liking polls as much as the next interested observer.....but isn't it all vanity / meaningless? I mean, yeah, sure - a 15 point deficit is an election loser for sure - but shouldn't bumps be interpreted on state by states?

It's all great when your guy is on top, but is there any real evidence that any recent Romney bump has changed the EC map significantly in favour of a likely chance of victory? Heck, even 50/50 chance?

Alternatively - is the argument that undecideds read the polls and are most likely to pick the leading man in the days just prior to voting day - rendering attractive polls, well........attractive.
Click to expand...

To some degree polls are sort of meaningless (which was my point in my post above to the Drinking One). They can be predictors as long as we attempt to account for the variables to the best of our ability. Factors like, polling methods, political leaning of the polling firm, previous accuracy etc. all have to be taken into account which people often forget.

There is valid information to be gained from polling data, when weighted correctly polling data can be pretty (or even very) accurate. But just relying on only ONE poll or ONE firm is like trying to understand a book after reading just one chapter. That chapter may well be critical to the book and some chapters are always going to be more important than others but if you skip all the other chapters you are never going to get the most accurate understanding of the whole story.
 
Most recent graphic from RCP

rcp1.jpg
 
Yeah well, I'm visiting the States come Christmas, and I don't want to have to get my belt of, so y'all just behave now, you hear?
 
BenBurch said:
Patience. This has been all over the map, and I don't expect that to change for a couple weeks.
Click to expand...
Why Obama Supporters Should Not Freak Out

RSN said:

In Denver ... Mr. Romney presented himself as an acceptable and competent alternative. Challengers also generally profit from the first debate: in 8 of the 10 election cycles since 1976, the polls moved against the incumbent, and a net gain of two or three percentage points for the challenger is a reasonably typical figure.

At the same time, incumbent presidents just aren’t that easy to defeat. Mr. Obama’s approval ratings are now hovering around 50 percent and don’t seem to have been negatively affected by his performance in Denver ...
Click to expand...
So, take a deep breath, Obama supporters. Stop refreshing the Real Clear Politics polling page every twelve seconds. Get some perspective. Be patient. And step away from the edge.
Click to expand...
:D Still, not a great week to quite sniffing glue.
 
RandFan said:
[qimg]http://imageshack.us/a/img191/3780/rcp1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

OTOH, the electoral map shows that Obama needs 19 electoral votes out of the toss-up states, while Romney needs 89. That means Obama needs one or two of them, and Romney needs all but one. (A slight improvement over last week when it showed he needed to run the table to win.)
 
malicus said:
Can this Scottish dude butt in and confess to liking polls as much as the next interested observer.....but isn't it all vanity / meaningless? I mean, yeah, sure - a 15 point deficit is an election loser for sure - but shouldn't bumps be interpreted on state by states?
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. National polls mean little to nothing now, beyond being fodder for media talking heads to fill in dead air time. It's the state by state polls that matter.

It's all great when your guy is on top, but is there any real evidence that any recent Romney bump has changed the EC map significantly in favour of a likely chance of victory? Heck, even 50/50 chance?
Click to expand...

Nope, no evidence of that at all. In fact, every reputable place I've looked with Electoral College predictions (including Real Clear Politics and FiveThirtyEight.com) still put President Obama way ahead in the Electoral College. This is one reason why the prediction markets still heavily favor Obama over Romney, methinks. Romney just has too much ground to make up in too many battleground states - it's not impossible, but the odds are heavily against him.

Alternatively - is the argument that undecideds read the polls and are most likely to pick the leading man in the days just prior to voting day - rendering attractive polls, well........attractive.
Click to expand...

I think it is attractive mostly to those who are grasping at straws in the final days before the election.
 
RandFan said:
[qimg]http://imageshack.us/a/img191/3780/rcp1.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Interesting. Many of those polls still include the period right after the post-debate bump but not the days where the jobs report news started to sink in. I predict in the next few days, once the polling cycle no longer includes the immediate time after the debate, Romney's lead will vanish.

Prediction: in one week (from today), it'll be Obama at +2 to +3 over Romney in the national poll average at RCP.

Anybody want a piece of this action? :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom