Romney, Obama, Rasmussen

Looks like Rassmussen is starting their just-before-the-election shift. Both their national poll and their Ohio poll show a tie now.
 
MattusMaximus said:
I don't think we can find a crow large enough to stick into that gaping chasm which is Dick Morris's mouth, but it'll be fun to make him eat it next Wednesday :D
Click to expand...

It doesn't happen that way. In our culture, people who make brash, laughably wrong predictions never get punished. Four years from now, he'll be on the same talk shows, selling the same books, making just as much money. For whatever reason, we simply don't hold people accountable for things like this.

If Obama wins, Morris will be all over the airwave talking about voter fraud, Obama's "last minute" comeback, etc. And nobody will make him eat crow, or force him to apologize, or otherwise make him look foolish. There are people out there who have been making dumb predictions for 30 years (predicting market crashes, collapse of the union if X gets re-elected) and they'll keep doing it until the day they die.
 
Funny, you did not hear all the right wing criticism of Silver and his methodology back in 2010 when he was predicting a huge GOP landslide in the House races.....

I would HATE to play Silver in WOW or any other RPG. You know he is the kind of playwho in combat would spend Ten minutes calculating the odds before he makes an attack or casts a spell.....
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Still, it's a probability and not any reflection of a margin. Mikedenk seemed unaware of that fact in considering whether Silver's high probability of an Obama win indicated a landslide.
Click to expand...

Very true, I completely agree. I specifically used the word "chances" in my post because that's all it is. It doesn't guarantee anything and it doesn't say anything about a margin of victory, just that the odds are (somewhat) significantly in Obama's favor right now.

Also, something else I thought was interesting. According to Nate, there are no more polls to be released going forward. It seems as if the numbers we see now are the numbers to go by until we get real election results. We are truly in the final stages.

Oh and one more interesting thing. I remember reading on Nate's blog directly before the first debate that, in general, debates all in all tend to not mean much at the end of the day. While I think the outcome of the first debate made things interesting for a few weeks, if you actually go back and look at the polling numbers it seems as if we are pretty much back to where we were.
 
David Wong said:
It doesn't happen that way. In our culture, people who make brash, laughably wrong predictions never get punished. Four years from now, he'll be on the same talk shows, selling the same books, making just as much money. For whatever reason, we simply don't hold people accountable for things like this.

If Obama wins, Morris will be all over the airwave talking about voter fraud, Obama's "last minute" comeback, etc. And nobody will make him eat crow, or force him to apologize, or otherwise make him look foolish. There are people out there who have been making dumb predictions for 30 years (predicting market crashes, collapse of the union if X gets re-elected) and they'll keep doing it until the day they die.
Click to expand...

Well, there was that time in the 2008 election cycle when Jon Stewart skewered Morris for being a hypocrite vis-a-vis Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin. I think the line worth remembering was when Stewart said:

"Now, now, now... to be fair, Dick Morris is a lying sack of ****!"

Gotta find that one online somewhere :D
 
Peephole said:
US debt didn't double.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the public debt, the trust funds etc are a different sort of debt, more a keeping track of liabilities. As for the rest of your post, I don't find that argument compelling nor that chart relevant, but this isn't the thread for it. :)
 
Last edited:
Kaosium said:
I was referring to the public debt, the trust funds etc are a different sort of debt, more a keeping track of liabilities. As for the rest of your post, I don't find that argument compelling nor that chart relevant, but this isn't the thread for it. :)
Click to expand...

On the date Barack Obama was inaugurated, Jan 20, 2009, debt held by the public was $6.307 trillion. On Nov. 1st 2012 it was $11.394 trillion. An increase of about 80%, not a doubling. Of course that was almost preordained due to the effects of the recession and the financial crisis that caused it. The economy was shrinking at a 9% annual rate when Obama took office and around 800,000 people/month were losing their jobs.
 
Puppycow said:
On the date Barack Obama was inaugurated, Jan 20, 2009, debt held by the public was $6.307 trillion. On Nov. 1st 2012 it was $11.394 trillion. An increase of about 80%, not a doubling.
Click to expand...

'Close enough for government work.' :)

(and especially off the cuff comments--if you thought that was intended as a detailed analysis you were mistaken!)
 
Ah, now the right breaks out a killer argument against Nate Silver: he's effeminate.

Right-Wing Analyst Says Nate Silver Is Too Much Of A Sissy To Crunch Poll Data

Since the 2008 election, self-described gay geek Nate Silver has emerged as the go-to guy for spot-on poll analysis and election predictions.

But, apparently, he’s so prescient he ticked off a right-wing blogger, who attacked him for being too “effeminate” and “soft-sounding” after Silver predicted a likely Obama win next week.

On October 25 Dean Chambers of Unskewed Polls wrote “The Far Left Turns to Nate Silver for Wisdom on the Polls” for Examiner.com, in which he lambasted our number-crunching dreamboat as “a thin and effeminate man with a soft-sounding voice.” He also suggested Silver could be a eunuch.

Nate Silver is a man of very small stature, a thin and effeminate man with a soft-sounding voice that sounds almost exactly like the “Mr. New Castrati” voice used by Rush Limbaugh on his program.

In fact, Silver could easily be the poster child for the New Castrati in both image and sound. Nate Silver, like most liberal and leftist celebrities and favorites, might be of average intelligence but is surely not the genius he’s made out to be. His political analyses are average at best and his projections, at least this year, are extremely biased in favor of the Democrats.​
Click to expand...
 
I wonder why RCP doesn't provide polling history per pollster per contest, at least for the current election cycle, so we can see trends. (Or do they?) Might this be a limit imposed by the polling organizations?
 
Pew's final poll: Obama 50, Romney 47

After finding a dead-even race in its previous poll, today the Pew Research Center tips Obama for a small lead in its last pre-election national survey:

"In the Pew Research Center’s election weekend survey, Obama holds a 48% to 45% lead over Romney among likely voters. ... Our final estimate of the national popular vote is Obama 50% and Romney 47%, when the undecided vote is allocated between the two candidates based on several indicators and opinions. ..."
Click to expand...
 
varwoche said:
I wonder why RCP doesn't provide polling history per pollster per contest, at least for the current election cycle, so we can see trends. (Or do they?) Might this be a limit imposed by the polling organizations?
Click to expand...
No, it's just not a very good website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom