Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Jimmy Leeds

Presidential Election Poll

Presidential Election/Unscientific Poll   42 members have voted

  1. 1. For those eligible, who are you voting for in November?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

175 posts in this topic

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/07/06/ABC-Politicizes-Gas-Prices

This is the type of stuff I am talking about. The lefty media (read: media) is going to make it sound like this is some sort of achievement by Obama.

IQ test? Fine by me, I get paid to go to school. Surely, the people in these videos do not.

Four years later, very little CHANGE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand by my prediction of a landslide of Carter-Reagan proportions. It's common sense.

Not one single McCain voter from four years ago will vote for Obama in 2012. But Obama will lose votes from several blocs because of his horrid record: Hispanics, women, white men, Catholics, Jews, small businesspeople. It's going to cost Obama every swing state, plus more. People are going to be talking about how inaccurate most polls were.

Watch as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin fall into the Romney column. Watch New Jersey and Nevada be nail-biters.

Let's watch and see.

lol

Back on Earth:

Obama 294

Romney 244

Care to make a wager? I'll put $100 on your prediction not even coming close to happening. Romney will not win PA or WI and Obama will win NJ by at least 6 points and will be one of the first 15 states called on election night. I'd say sooner, but polls close at 7 or 730 in a lot of states that are already decided one way or another. NJ will likely be called right at 8pm when polls close. Nevada being a nail-biter? There's nothing out there that says it won't be. That's why its considered a battleground and both candidates are there in the last two weeks. Romney's not even spending any ad money in PA and the Super-PACs are barely spending any (they're spending more in California!) and neither is Obama. That's a huge telling point that he feels its already lost. Where they spend money and where they visit says all you need to know about which states are actual contests. Ohio, Florida, Colorado, and VA are the biggest battlegrounds right now. PA is a huge get and Bush/Gore and Bush/Kerry spent tons of time and $$ there and Bush lost there twice. If it was a battleground, they'd park their butts there. Even Rasmussen (a right leaning pollster) has Obama up by 5 points in PA lol.

What they'll be talking about is how Romney's first debate performance really didn't matter at the end of the day except tightening up the race.

The polls are never that inaccurate in modern times. National polls don't mean a lot because the sample could be coming from anywhere, but the battleground polls in 04 and 08 were pretty damn accurate this close to the election.

If Romney is to win, it will be 2000 or 2004 margins and will be because he won Ohio. It won't even be close to a runaway margin. If he wins the tally will be within 10 electoral votes.

Edited by ghdi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GHDI, laugh like Biden all you want, get ready for the shocker on Election Day. It's over.

Put your money where your mouth is. $100.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put your money where your mouth is. $100.

Lol, have to prep for Taxmageddon and Obamacare some how, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta say, that Third Party debate was a LOT of fun to watch! Two of them leaned left, and two leaned right. And amazingly, they were all cordial to each other and even agreed on many points.

True there were some format glitches, and of course they all have no shot at winning, but still it was great hearing a fresh exchange of ideas.

Yeah it was great to watch and the end was awesome when Christina Tobin announced that there will be another one next Tuesday with the top two third party candidates after a day of online voting on the Free and Equal website. I'm really looking forward to that.

In case anyone doesn't have time to watch the entire thing here, you can see some highlights

After watching that debate, I really think that Johnson would obliterate Obama and Romney in a debate, and wouldn't have a hard time winning the election if he had the same kind of exposure they have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...........and this is why Romney wins in a landslide because it's about the economy.

I stand by my prediction of a landslide of Carter-Reagan proportions. It's common sense.

Not one single McCain voter from four years ago will vote for Obama in 2012. But Obama will lose votes from several blocs because of his horrid record: Hispanics, women, white men, Catholics, Jews, small businesspeople. It's going to cost Obama every swing state, plus more. People are going to be talking about how inaccurate most polls were.

Watch as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin fall into the Romney column. Watch New Jersey and Nevada be nail-biters.

Let's watch and see.

These statements sound more like pep rally/cheerleading type stuff than anything grounded in reality. This would be like a commentator in the fourth quarter of an NFL game where one team leads 23 to 20, saying that the team that's behind is going to rally and win in a blowout. Such things are not impossible, but no honest person can say that it will happen.

What would be a landslide? 100 electoral vote margin?

There are 538 electoral votes to be had, so 269-269 is an even split (if that were the result, the House of Reps would elect Romney President). So what do you think? Is 319-219 a landslide? 344-195? 291-247? The latter one is about the best win Romney could hope for at this point.

Here's a good website for data about all of the elections. They're independent, and I've heard their work cited by both conservative and liberal commentators.

http://cookpolitical.com

&

http://cookpolitical...harts/scorecard

Using their data, if we assuming that each candidate wins the states that are leaning their way, Romney trails 206 to 243. That means Obama needs 27 of the 89 toss-up votes. Florida alone gives him that, but FL is definitely a state where Romney can perform. It did go for Bush twice (barely). Losing Ohio doesn't automatically cause Romney to lose, but he's on life support if he does. So if we assume that the Toss Up states are a coin flip proposition (they are call "Toss Ups" after all), and that Romney must win both FL & OH, we're only talking about a 25% likely scenario. The good news for him would be that he would be in control at that point. So it would appear that Romney has about a 20% chance of winning the election. Very doable, but he's way behind President Obama.

*Of course this analysis is a bit simplistic. There are certain relationships among the states where if a candidate takes one of the swing states, he is then more or less likely to take the other ones in the relationship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After watching that debate, I really think that Johnson would obliterate Obama and Romney in a debate, and wouldn't have a hard time winning the election if he had the same kind of exposure they have.

You may be right. I think the big question is, would he, or any of the others, maintain their authenticity as they got close to competitiveness. I think that sense of authenticity is where so much third party appeal comes from, versus all of the BS that we hear Reps and Dems tell us on a general basis. But if you were so close to winning and thought that spinning/fibbing some part of your political platform might give you that little uptick to win, wouldn't you have to feel the heat to do it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great brief article.

"While 2008 presidential candidate Obama appeared to champion universal health care, his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had spent years lobbying on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept...This time around, the honey-tongued President makes populist references to economic justice, while simultaneously appointing as his new Chief of Staff a former Citigroup executive concerned with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right. I think the big question is, would he, or any of the others, maintain their authenticity as they got close to competitiveness. I think that sense of authenticity is where so much third party appeal comes from, versus all of the BS that we hear Reps and Dems tell us on a general basis. But if you were so close to winning and thought that spinning/fibbing some part of your political platform might give you that little uptick to win, wouldn't you have to feel the heat to do it?

I don't think he would lose his authenticity, he didn't seem to have to do that in order to become a two-term governor of New Mexico. I think the Democrats and Republicans lose it because they are corrupted by the corporate dollars that fund their campaigns. A lot of these third party people used to be Democrats or Republicans and left the party because of reasons like that, so I think they are all about their authenticity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's not going to be 489-49! I exaggerated when I said "Carter-Reagan proportions." I should have just said that it will be a Romney runaway, and that's all. What would be a landslide? 100 electoral vote margin?

I figured :P

I think 100 is probably fair line (that would also mean Obama won '08 by a landslide). We could also look at the popular vote, although carter actually did relatively well compared to his electoral trouncing so maybe that's not a good indicator, there probably will never be as big of a percentage swing in the popular vote as the electoral college.

Let's put it this way, I would be shocked if Romney won breaks 300 electoral votes. I don't mean that to be argumentative, it would just far and away invalidate all polling data over the last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say Romney gets to 315 or 320, with Romney getting Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin. All these states are tight according to several polls, and I think the enthusiasm to fire Obama will be the difference that pushes all of them to Romney. Wishful thinking? We'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope Romney gets to 315 or 320, with Romney getting Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin. All these states are tight according to several polls, and I hope the enthusiasm to fire Obama will be the difference that pushes all of them to Romney. Wishful thinking? We'll see.

Fixed that for you. Its beyond wishful thinking and goes beyond rational thought.

"According to several polls". Howbout citing one?

I'll give you 12 PA polls:

Gravis Marketing 10/21 - 10/21 887 LV 3.3 48 45 Obama +3 Morning Call 10/17 - 10/21 444 LV 5.0 50 45 Obama +5 Quinnipiac 10/12 - 10/14 1519 LV 2.5 50 46 Obama +4 PPP (D) 10/12 - 10/14 500 LV 4.4 51 44 Obama +7 Morning Call 10/10 - 10/14 438 LV 5.0 49 45 Obama +4 Rasmussen Reports 10/9 - 10/9 500 LV 4.5 51 46 Obama +5 Philadelphia Inquirer 10/4 - 10/8 600 LV 4.0 50 42 Obama +8 Susquehanna 10/4 - 10/6 725 LV 3.7 47 45 Obama +2 Siena 10/1 - 10/5 545 LV 4.2 43 40 Obama +3 Morning Call 9/22 - 9/26 427 LV 5.0 49 42 Obama +7 CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac 9/18 - 9/24 1162 LV 3.0 54 42 Obama +12 Franklin & Marshall 9/18 - 9/23 392 LV 4.9 52 43 Obama +9

And more:

10/22 http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012.10.22_Pennsylvania.pdf

10/22 http://www.scribd.com/doc/110754880/Oct-22-Muhlenberg-College-Morning-Call-Poll

The last time Romney led a poll in PA was in FEBRUARY and it was by 2 points. The chance of the polls being that wrong are virtually nil. Give up this argument. There's a reason why neither side are spending ad money in PA. If Romney's campaign even smelled a little bit of a chance to win there, they'd be there constantly (even more than Ohio) and spending a lot of money there and their internal polling is what they rely on more than anything public. If Obama felt any heat there, he'd be spending more money there than just about any other place other than Ohio since it hasnt gone GOP in almost 30 years. Romney hasn't spent a dime there in over a month. Even Rasmussen, which is a right-leaning poll, has Obama up by 5. Tighter doesn't mean flipped.

On the flipside here's the final polls in PA from 04 (which Kerry won)

657 LV

3.9

48

49

-

Kerry +1

601 LV

4.1

46

50

-

Kerry +4

766 LV

3.6

47

51

-

Kerry +4

601 LV

4.1

50

46

-

Bush +4

801 LV

3.0

46

47

-

Kerry +1

909 LV

3.3

47

47

-

TIE

600 LV

4.0

47

49

-

Kerry +2

625 LV

4.0

46

48

-

Kerry +2

801 LV

3.0

48

48

-

TIE

684 LV

3.7

45

50

-

Kerry +5

1488 LV

4.0

47

48

-

Kerry +1

585 LV

4.0

47

50

-

Kerry +3

The two candidates were also spending beaucoup $$ and visiting there constantly up until the last weeks of the election and Kerry ended up winning it by 3 points, which just looking at these polling #s over the last week or so of the campaign is about the average he led. Polls can be wrong, but the type of flipping you're talking about would be unprecedented, espc with the fact there's no visiting or spending going on from either side. Polling is obviously an inexact science, but all of your predicting the last page of this thread has been nothing but hope without any weight to it.

Obama will win PA, WI and OH. WI and OH will be close, maybe even recount close. 1-3 point victories in each with WI being the larger margin. He'll win PA by 3-5 and NJ by 6-8. He's going to lose NC and I wouldnt bet on FL, but we all know how nutty FL can be. I think FL goes to Romney by 2-3. The night is interesting until about 10-11. Then one of the big two (FL or OH) will be called for Obama and that will be the ballgame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why include polls that are over a month old? Nobody cares what the polls were a month ago.

http://www.realclear...obama-1891.html

So the last 5 polls listed have Obama up a few points, but often within the margin of error for the poll.

I'm not saying Romney will win PA, but it's not a guarantee Obama wins either.

Since it's beyond rational thought and you like to bet, I'll lay out $2 to your $100 dollars that Romney wins PA. :lol:

Also, Ryan just visited PA over the weekend.

Edited by Devils731

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The person who says Obama governs as a centrist talks about rational thought. Get outta here!

He governs more like a Republican than a centrist.

"This is a US election that defies logic and brings the nation closer towards a one-party state masquerading as a two-party state.

The Democratic incumbent has surrounded himself with conservative advisors and key figures — many from previous administrations, and an unprecedented number from the Trilateral Commission. He also appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA. He has extended Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, presided over a spiralling rich-poor gap and sacrificed further American jobs with recent free trade deals. Trade union rights have also eroded under his watch. He has expanded Bush defence spending, droned civilians, failed to close Guantanamo, supported the NDAA which effectively legalises martial law, allowed drilling and adopted a soft-touch position towards the banks that is to the right of European Conservative leaders. Taking office during the financial meltdown, Obama appointed its principle architects to top economic positions. We list these because many of Obama's detractors absurdly portray him as either a radical liberal or a socialist, while his apologists, equally absurdly, continue to view him as a well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming pressures."

http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have picked the gallup tracking poll if you wanted to cherry pick rosey numbers, they had Romney up 52-45 amongst LV's a few days ago.

Cherry picked? I used the poll that was released today. Every news organization is reporting this poll.

I guess if I used a month old poll that would have been less cherry picked. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cherry picked? I used the poll that was released today. Every news organization is reporting this poll.

I guess if I used a month old poll that would have been less cherry picked. :lol:

6 major polls are released daily as well as other scattered ones, it's more accurate to view them in aggregate. But, like I said if you were going to try and pick a poll that favored your guy, a few days ago gall up had him +7 and still has him +3, so I guess my point is less about you cherry picking to be disingenuous and more about "who cares one what given poll says".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 major polls are released daily as well as other scattered ones, it's more accurate to view them in aggregate. But, like I said if you were going to try and pick a poll that favored your guy, a few days ago gall up had him +7 and still has him +3, so I guess my point is less about you cherry picking to be disingenuous and more about "who cares one what given poll says".

Why not use the link I already posted? It's much more relevant than the one you posted and already made the point you wanted to make.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html

It's for Pennsylvania, which was the topic of discussion. GHDI asked for even one poll that showed Pennsylvania is close and am showing him a poll that has Romney in the lead.

That's neither cherry picking nor disingenuous.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Devilsfan26, you are trying way too hard to make a square peg fit in a round hole. President Food Stamps LOVES the welfare state and he loves big government. Welfare spending has exploded under his presidency. He would be right at home governing in western Europe. He would love to get single-payer health care, but it's not politically feasible in the US at this time. He can't be a Marxist and use drones to kill people? Don't think so.

Taken IN context, President Obama revealed his true self when he said "you didn't build that." He told the American people that we can thank the government for building "roads and bridges" (god, does this broken-record president love to say "roads and bridges") so that the private sector can exist. From this conservative's point of view, he's got it backwards. The roads are built to serve the needs of the private sector ... the people. The private sector is the master, and government is the servant. Obama believes just the opposite, which makes him a statist, Marxist, socialist ... they all fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not use the link I already posted? It's much more relevant than the one you posted and already made the point you wanted to make.

http://www.realclear...obama-1891.html

It's for Pennsylvania, which was the topic of discussion. GHDI asked for even one poll that showed Pennsylvania is close and am showing him a poll that has Romney in the lead.

That's neither cherry picking nor disingenuous.

Fair enough I didn't see your first link on the bottom of page 7. I still don't understand why you cited a Romney +2 national poll if you are trying to make the case that PA is competitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From this conservative's point of view, he's got it backwards. The roads are built to serve the needs of the private sector ... the people. The private sector is the master, and government is the servant. Obama believes just the opposite, which makes him a statist, Marxist, socialist ... they all fit.

More importantly, he missed the point that a thriving private sector is what pays for the roads and schools that everyone gets to use. If you don't believe this, just ask why Detroit has most of its budget paid for by taxpayers that don't live in Detroit, or think of what would happen to the NYC public school system if all the 1 percenters decided to move out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0