If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Debate bounce? Two weeks ago, Obama and Romney were tied in Ohio. Today, Obama is up by 4 points   (politico.com) divider line 174
    More: Interesting, Mitt Romney, obama, Ohio, PPP, young voters  
•       •       •

1399 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Oct 2012 at 11:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



174 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-29 07:43:03 AM  
FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?
 
2012-10-29 07:43:08 AM  
Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.
 
2012-10-29 08:08:25 AM  

cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?


You're asking for sensibility of people who choose to live in Ohio?
 
2012-10-29 08:10:08 AM  

Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.


Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.
 
2012-10-29 09:24:04 AM  

Mugato: Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.


Unlikely, unfortunately.
 
2012-10-29 09:30:38 AM  
Tomorrow's headline: Rasmussan poll give Romney 5 point lead in Ohio. Suck my balls libs.
 
2012-10-29 10:05:07 AM  

cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?


Logic would dictate that both polls were probably off within their respective margin of errors and that Obama was probably up 2 points the whole time.
 
2012-10-29 10:11:49 AM  
Democrat pollster is an outlier to all the other polls.

what a surprise!!!!
 
2012-10-29 10:27:25 AM  

cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?


If you want consistency, go to FiveThirtyEight. His latest blog post is about how the polls are basically back to where they were on June 7th after the convention and debate fluctuations. Media outlets breathlessly reporting every swing state poll as if they're directly related is vacillating nonsense.
 
2012-10-29 10:29:03 AM  
Or, it's just a reversion to the norm for this election. If you look at 538's trendlines and remove the convention and debate periods, the lines have barely moved the entire cycle.
 
2012-10-29 11:19:57 AM  
In before people who want to pretend there is only one poll these days tries to site the latest Rasmussen despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.
 
2012-10-29 11:20:35 AM  
Oh goodie, let's argue some more about polls.
 
2012-10-29 11:20:49 AM  
Wow, it's as if you can't find any reliable data based on the remaining splinters of society who have land lines or something.
 
2012-10-29 11:21:06 AM  
When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.
 
2012-10-29 11:21:42 AM  
It's almost as if polls given evidence, rather than proof, of the election results.
 
2012-10-29 11:22:24 AM  
A four point lead would be in line with an actual two point lead, just as a tied poll would be. Indications are that Obama has a two point lead in Ohio.

Out of 28 polls of Ohio this month, 20 show Obama ahead, 4 show Romney ahead, 4 show it tied.

Obama is leading in Ohio.
 
2012-10-29 11:22:28 AM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.


I shouldn't even have to ask this, but does Ken Blackwell hold any position of power in Ohio this election?
 
2012-10-29 11:22:37 AM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.


I'm sure there is some shady counter-coup shiat going on at the Federal level. No way in hell do I see the Administration just sitting back and letting that happen.
 
2012-10-29 11:23:17 AM  
Today: img0.fark.netDebate bounce? Two weeks ago, Obama and Romney were tied in Ohio. Today, Obama is up by 4 points

Yesterday: img0.fark.netTwo weeks ago, Obama had a 5 point lead in Ohio. Today, Romney has tied it up

Whatever side you're on, you can be a winner!
 
2012-10-29 11:23:21 AM  

mrshowrules: cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

Logic would dictate that both polls were probably off within their respective margin of errors and that Obama was probably up 2 points the whole time.


That's what Nate Silver's been saying for weeks. Despite a couple of bounces for both Obama and Romney, the race has been settling on an equilibrium of Obama +2.
 
2012-10-29 11:24:01 AM  
I'm sorry libs. I can't hear your bullcrap over my freedom.
i6.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-29 11:24:18 AM  

lennavan: Today: [img0.fark.net image 77x27]Debate bounce? Two weeks ago, Obama and Romney were tied in Ohio. Today, Obama is up by 4 points

Yesterday: [img0.fark.net image 77x27]Two weeks ago, Obama had a 5 point lead in Ohio. Today, Romney has tied it up

Whatever side you're on, you can be a winner!


Paging Mr. NotShryke, Paging Mr. NotShryke.

You are being requested to apologize on the floor. Thank you.
 
2012-10-29 11:24:31 AM  
I dont know libs....

unskewedpolls.com
 
2012-10-29 11:24:54 AM  
Two weeks ago: X

Today: Slightly different X.
 
2012-10-29 11:25:06 AM  

Mentat: Tomorrow's headline: Rasmussan poll give Romney 5 point lead in Ohio. Suck my balls libs.


Take a look, and tell me which one doesn't belong. Link
 
2012-10-29 11:25:30 AM  

I_Am_Weasel: cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

You're asking for sensibility of people who choose to live in Ohio?


I can understand Eastern Ohio. It's practically Pennsylvania.

But Columbus??? Or Cincinnati? With what they call chili???
 
2012-10-29 11:25:49 AM  

Zapruder: I'm sorry libs. I can't hear your bullcrap over my freedom.


The best part of that map is MI going red.
 
2012-10-29 11:26:22 AM  
1. Silent majority.
2. 30% of Bachmann supporters support Kolob.
3. Harmonize statistic quirks.
 
2012-10-29 11:26:25 AM  
That's OK, Romney will win the next debate.
 
2012-10-29 11:26:29 AM  
Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...
 
2012-10-29 11:27:12 AM  

coeyagi: 1. Silent majority.
2. 30% of Bachmann supporters support Kolob.
3. Harmonize statistic quirks.


What you did there...see it, I do.
 
2012-10-29 11:27:24 AM  
i1.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-10-29 11:29:07 AM  
The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.
 
2012-10-29 11:30:08 AM  
Random Sampling, how does it work?

/no one has changed their minds in weeks
 
2012-10-29 11:30:24 AM  

EyeballKid: Wow, it's as if you can't find any reliable data based on the remaining splinters of society who have land lines or something.


Wow, if only someone had told polling organizations about this!
 
2012-10-29 11:30:38 AM  
static5.businessinsider.com

Unskewed Pollster is in the bushes watching you masturbate.
 
2012-10-29 11:31:02 AM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.


Well, that's part of why the GOP puppetmasters are trying so hard to pump out the claim that Romney is just oh-so-close in Ohio. Because if everyone knows Obama has it wrapped up going into the election, it'll make a greater number of people more likely to be suspicious. They already had a close call with the unprecedented exit polling disparity (against reported results) in the 2000 and 2004 elections.
 
2012-10-29 11:31:11 AM  
The plight of the internet. We live in information age. The problem is the masses don't know how to interpret that information. We need to teach statistics and probability; at the least most still will have a grasp of the basic Gaussian distribution.

We would see less headlines like "statistical dead heat" as many will be able to call out the bullshiat stains of the mass media. Until then people will believe polls and "skew" them to whomever satisfies their political discourse.

Just stop it and grasp the basic elementary concept of statistics and probability.
 
2012-10-29 11:31:12 AM  

Mugato: Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.


If a Democrat going against an incumbent Republican had made that gaffe at any point in the election, it would have been news for 36 hours at least.

Librul Media my ass
 
2012-10-29 11:31:14 AM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...


Trust me, the Secret Service examines all threats, and is probably working over time this election season.

In fact, I think they are hiring.
 
2012-10-29 11:31:14 AM  

lemurs: The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.


Hyperbolic vitriol? Um, did Obama start a war under false pretenses? Did he single-handedly take our foreign policy and flush it down the crapper?
 
182
2012-10-29 11:31:41 AM  

Mentat: Suck my balls libs.


detach your republican congressman, first and they'll get right to it.
 
2012-10-29 11:32:18 AM  
Well Ohio is New York's path to the sea, so you can see why they're in the tank for Obama.
 
2012-10-29 11:32:43 AM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...


In all fairness, there are the same types of people talking about assassinating Romney.

That being said, based upon the way things are going, I'll be happy on November 7th. I won't be overjoyed, because Obama is far from what I'd like to see, since he's a center-right authoritarian politician, but it's the better option over Romney since poor Jill doesn't have any sort of shot.
 
2012-10-29 11:32:49 AM  

MFAWG: Mugato: Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.

If a Democrat going against an incumbent Republican had made that gaffe at any point in the election, it would have been news for 36 hours at least.

Librul Media my ass


It's funny to see how the pendulum hasn't swung so much as fallen into a giant heap of metal and wire. No one trusts the media any longer. They only trust "their" media, be it bloggers, Fox News, or whatever.
 
2012-10-29 11:32:55 AM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations


what is a "code iteration"?
 
2012-10-29 11:34:06 AM  

coeyagi: lemurs: The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.

Um, did Obama start a war under false pretenses? Did he single-handedly take our foreign policy and flush it down the crapper?


No.
No, not single-handedly, he had help from Hillary.
 
2012-10-29 11:34:35 AM  

Girl From The North Country: Well Ohio is New York's path to the sea, so you can see why they're in the tank for Obama.


I heard an Ohio bank provided 10% of the funding for "The Innocence of Muslims" video that was used as a red herring for the Benghazi attack, so I can understand why they're in the tank for Obama.
 
2012-10-29 11:34:49 AM  

meat0918: I_Am_Weasel: cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

You're asking for sensibility of people who choose to live in Ohio?

I can understand Eastern Ohio. It's practically Pennsylvania.

But Columbus??? Or Cincinnati? With what they call chili???


hey, we are the only ones who make chili right!
 
2012-10-29 11:35:46 AM  

SuperT: meat0918: I_Am_Weasel: cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

You're asking for sensibility of people who choose to live in Ohio?

I can understand Eastern Ohio. It's practically Pennsylvania.

But Columbus??? Or Cincinnati? With what they call chili???

hey, we are the only ones who make chili right!


I don't mind the allspice or cinnamon, but then again I accidentally made Cincinnati style chili once a long long time ago.
 
2012-10-29 11:35:52 AM  

Rapmaster2000: static5.businessinsider.com[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

Unskewed Pollster is in the bushes watching you masturbate.


This is what I'm talking about. This fat piece of excrement can get away with his BS because people don't understand basic probability and statistical theories.

fark him and the people that believe polls.
 
2012-10-29 11:35:54 AM  
PPP is Democratics leaning. That being said, the last 17 polls of Ohio have had Obama leading or an exact tie (Source: 538). He is obviously ahead there, assuming a fair election.
 
2012-10-29 11:36:14 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-29 11:36:31 AM  

Mentat: Tomorrow's headline: Rasmussan poll give Romney 5 point lead in Ohio. Suck my balls libs.


i449.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-29 11:36:36 AM  
Fartmussen shows Romney with a 2-point lead, his first ever Ohio lead. Suck it, libs.
 
2012-10-29 11:37:02 AM  
You know what is going to happen on election day?

It is going to be real close, so close in fact that both candidates and their running mates get together and go on national TV. Each will give a speech. Then, during Romney's speech, Ryan is going to tap him on the shoulder, he will turn around, and Ryan is going to kick him in the stomach and give him a stunner. Obama will smile, and Biden will look confused. Then, Obama is going to go to shake Biden's hand, and turn it into a Rock Bottom. Ryan is going to do the face turn, while Biden is going to do the heel turn, and then it'll be a tag team match of Romney/Biden vs. Obama/Ryan for the presidency. And you don't want to know what'll happen during that.
 
2012-10-29 11:37:13 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations

what is a "code iteration"?


Well, see, there's this thing called Google...

(I'll give you a cookie today. At least, for once, you admitted that you're ignorant on a subject)
 
2012-10-29 11:37:23 AM  

Rapmaster2000: [static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

Unskewed Pollster is in the bushes watching you masturbate.


So, does that guy truly believe that statistics is all just an art, a method of pulling numbers out of one's ass? At least Silver seems to have an objective methodology based on actual statistical methods.

Dean Chambers on the other hand applies something akin to a 4th-grader's interpretation of how statistical analysis might work. It should be embarrassing.
 
2012-10-29 11:37:24 AM  

coeyagi: Hyperbolic vitriol? Um, did Obama start a war under false pretenses? Did he single-handedly take our foreign policy and flush it down the crapper?


As far as objective reality goes, it's easy to make a case that Bush performed a lot worse as president than Obama has in their first terms. But mainstream voters never bought into attempts to demonize Bush for his mistakes, and voting "not Bush" wasn't sufficient to get Kerry elected. Just as voting "not Obama" isn't going to be enough to get Romney into office.
 
2012-10-29 11:38:08 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations

what is a "code iteration"?


Something you will never understand.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:28 AM  
Rasmussen has Romney up by 2 in Ohio
PPP has Obama up by 4 you say?

But, liberals on fark have told me that Rasmussen changes his numbers close to the election to make them more accurate.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:32 AM  
static5.businessinsider.com

Professional Dildo Tester Dean Chambers
 
2012-10-29 11:40:33 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations

what is a "code iteration"?


Iteration means the act of repeating a process with the aim of approaching a desired goal,target or result.

Genetic programming is an example where code is created and run then modified then run again. You keep doing the modifying and testing until you get what you're looking for. Sort of like politics.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:43 AM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Or, it's just a reversion to the norm for this election. If you look at 538's trendlines and remove the convention and debate periods, the lines have barely moved the entire cycle.


This. The media has their own "close horse race" narrative they've been trying to sell to the morans, but the truth is, it's never been all that close , and Romney has never had a lead in electoral votes. Not even for a day. There's going to be some serious head-asploding amongst the right-wing echo chamber crowd, come November 7th.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:44 AM  

meat0918: MFAWG: Mugato: Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.

If a Democrat going against an incumbent Republican had made that gaffe at any point in the election, it would have been news for 36 hours at least.

Librul Media my ass

It's funny to see how the pendulum hasn't swung so much as fallen into a giant heap of metal and wire. No one trusts the media any longer. They only trust "their" media, be it bloggers, Fox News, or whatever.


Not reporting what should have been a campaign ending gaffe had very little to do with ideology.
 
2012-10-29 11:40:46 AM  
PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.
 
2012-10-29 11:42:01 AM  

WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.


Unskewed polls is the only poll that matters at this point in the game. Amirite?
 
2012-10-29 11:42:25 AM  

randomjsa: Rasmussen has Romney up by 2 in Ohio
PPP has Obama up by 4 you say?

But, liberals on fark have told me that Rasmussen changes his numbers close to the election to make them more accurate.


No, we said he makes them accurate ON the day of the election, but thanks for making us think you're a liar.

WHY DO YOU HATE YOURSELF that you'd make us think you're a liar?
 
2012-10-29 11:42:31 AM  

machoprogrammer: You know what is going to happen on election day?

It is going to be real close, so close in fact that both candidates and their running mates get together and go on national TV. Each will give a speech. Then, during Romney's speech, Ryan is going to tap him on the shoulder, he will turn around, and Ryan is going to kick him in the stomach and give him a stunner. Obama will smile, and Biden will look confused. Then, Obama is going to go to shake Biden's hand, and turn it into a Rock Bottom. Ryan is going to do the face turn, while Biden is going to do the heel turn, and then it'll be a tag team match of Romney/Biden vs. Obama/Ryan for the presidency. And you don't want to know what'll happen during that.


No. Clinton and Gore are going to run in with steel chairs and take all of them out, all the while the King will be screaming into the mic "Clinton is back, Clinton is back!"
 
2012-10-29 11:43:55 AM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations

what is a "code iteration"?


It's when you back-track the signals to find the wastrels posting crap on the internets.
 
2012-10-29 11:44:11 AM  

Jackson Herring: [static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

Professional Dildo Tester Dean Chambers


Goddamit you just made me choke on a Twix bar. I hereby fart on your bongos, sir!
 
2012-10-29 11:44:57 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: machoprogrammer: You know what is going to happen on election day?

It is going to be real close, so close in fact that both candidates and their running mates get together and go on national TV. Each will give a speech. Then, during Romney's speech, Ryan is going to tap him on the shoulder, he will turn around, and Ryan is going to kick him in the stomach and give him a stunner. Obama will smile, and Biden will look confused. Then, Obama is going to go to shake Biden's hand, and turn it into a Rock Bottom. Ryan is going to do the face turn, while Biden is going to do the heel turn, and then it'll be a tag team match of Romney/Biden vs. Obama/Ryan for the presidency. And you don't want to know what'll happen during that.

No. Clinton and Gore are going to run in with steel chairs and take all of them out, all the while the King will be screaming into the mic "Clinton is back, Clinton is back!"


BAH GAWD KING! THOSE MEN WERE BROKEN IN HALF!

That would make a hell of a feud for the 2016 election, that is for sure. I hope it happens.
 
2012-10-29 11:45:41 AM  
mine:

i.chzbgr.com
 
2012-10-29 11:48:51 AM  

Zapruder: I'm sorry libs. I can't hear your bullcrap over my freedom.
[i6.photobucket.com image 758x565]


NateGrey: I dont know libs....

[unskewedpolls.com image 600x515]


COLORS! PRETTY!

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 600x515]


lulz
 
2012-10-29 11:49:51 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-29 11:49:53 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: machoprogrammer: You know what is going to happen on election day?

It is going to be real close, so close in fact that both candidates and their running mates get together and go on national TV. Each will give a speech. Then, during Romney's speech, Ryan is going to tap him on the shoulder, he will turn around, and Ryan is going to kick him in the stomach and give him a stunner. Obama will smile, and Biden will look confused. Then, Obama is going to go to shake Biden's hand, and turn it into a Rock Bottom. Ryan is going to do the face turn, while Biden is going to do the heel turn, and then it'll be a tag team match of Romney/Biden vs. Obama/Ryan for the presidency. And you don't want to know what'll happen during that.

No. Clinton and Gore are going to run in with steel chairs and take all of them out, all the while the King will be screaming into the mic "Clinton is back, Clinton is back!"


Now THIS I would tune in for!
 
2012-10-29 11:51:06 AM  

Zapruder: I'm sorry libs. I can't hear your bullcrap over my freedom.
[i6.photobucket.com image 758x565]


I am really tempted to post this on my facebook to see how many of my conservative friends start sharing it.
 
2012-10-29 11:51:55 AM  

Summoner101: Zapruder: I'm sorry libs. I can't hear your bullcrap over my freedom.

The best part of that map is MI going red.


It wouldn't be truthy enough without at least 1 Maine vote going red.

/Teh County and Washington County: we put the "red" in redneck
 
2012-10-29 11:52:05 AM  

WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.


What's funny is I haven't seen anyone refute the voter turnout argument. Libs are just as bad when it comes to "I reject your reality and substitute my own"
 
2012-10-29 11:52:21 AM  
i.qkme.me
 
2012-10-29 11:56:49 AM  

lennavan: Today: [img0.fark.net image 77x27]Debate bounce? Two weeks ago, Obama and Romney were tied in Ohio. Today, Obama is up by 4 points

Yesterday: [img0.fark.net image 77x27]Two weeks ago, Obama had a 5 point lead in Ohio. Today, Romney has tied it up

Whatever side you're on, you can be a winner!


Only one of those is a troll though. Welcome to Fark.
 
2012-10-29 11:57:07 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-29 11:57:50 AM  

Drakin030: WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.

What's funny is I haven't seen anyone refute the voter turnout argument. Libs are just as bad when it comes to "I reject your reality and substitute my own"


It seems like most 'libs' on this thread think the 4 point lead is too high and think it is really only around 2 points for the president. What thread have you been reading?
 
2012-10-29 11:58:00 AM  
Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).
 
2012-10-29 12:00:05 PM  

Cletus C.: Oh goodie, let's argue some more about polls.


It's election season. This is what we do here. Get used to it.
 
2012-10-29 12:00:07 PM  
i.qkme.me
 
2012-10-29 12:00:34 PM  

Drakin030: WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.

What's funny is I haven't seen anyone refute the voter turnout argument. Libs are just as bad when it comes to "I reject your reality and substitute my own"


Which is naturally why the evil "libs" on here have been saying that it's about the ground game for the last week.
 
2012-10-29 12:02:41 PM  

LockeOak: mine:

[i.chzbgr.com image 300x500]


still brilliant
 
2012-10-29 12:02:53 PM  

WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).


So weekday polls are more accurate because Republican voters.....are at home to answer the phone?
 
2012-10-29 12:03:24 PM  
Did they poll the same people? If not, the results may be skewed.
 
2012-10-29 12:06:23 PM  

NateGrey: WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).

So weekday polls are more accurate because Republican voters.....are at home to answer the phone?


Polls are also more accurate when they don't include cell phones, because that is the tried and true model we've used for 50 years now.

/This is what the tea party actually believes.
 
2012-10-29 12:06:34 PM  

WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).


No matter what you say, Obama is still up in Ohio, though, unless every single pollster has it wrong (which they don't). Infodump from 538 follows:

Ohio



FiveThirtyEight Projections

Dem

Rep

Margin



Polling average

48.4

45.6

Obama +2.8



Adjusted polling average

48.3

45.9

Obama +2.4



State fundamentals

46.8

47.9

Romney +1.1



Now-cast

48.2

46.0

Obama +2.2



Projected vote share±3.3

50.5

48.3

Obama +2.2



Chance of winning

75%

25%

Polls

538 WT.

Date

Dem

Rep

Margin



PPP


10/28

51.0

47.0

Obama +4.0



Gravis Marketing


10/27

50.0

49.0

Obama +1.0



CNN/Opinion Research *


10/25

48.0

44.0

Obama +4.0



Purple Strategies


10/25

46.0

44.0

Obama +2.0



American Research Group


10/25

49.0

47.0

Obama +2.0



Lake Research Partners


10/23

46.0

44.0

Obama +2.0



Rasmussen


10/23

48.0

48.0

Tie



Time/SRBI


10/23

49.0

44.0

Obama +5.0



U. of Cincinnati/Ohio Poll


10/23

49.0

49.0

Tie



SurveyUSA


10/22

47.0

44.0

Obama +3.0



Suffolk *


10/21

47.0

47.0

Tie



PPP


10/20

49.0

48.0

Obama +1.0



Angus Reid


10/20

45.0

45.0

Tie



Quinnipiac


10/20

50.0

45.0

Obama +5.0



Gravis Marketing


10/19

47.0

47.0

Tie



Fox News


10/18

46.0

43.0

Obama +3.0



Rasmussen


10/17

49.0

48.0

Obama +1.0
 
2012-10-29 12:06:48 PM  

WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).


Okay, now you're doing too much.
 
2012-10-29 12:08:10 PM  

WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).


Haha, that's good stuff. I didn't know Republicans went to church on Saturday and Sunday, they most truly be more pious than the rest of us.

Anyway, the polls are close in Ohio. Even if we can say Obama has lead the majority of them, even if we say Republicans are at church and under sampled, they're close. Which is why it is lucky Romney's family bought all those voting machines to make sure there is funny business.

Er, no funny business, I meant.
 
2012-10-29 12:08:24 PM  
Well if this blogger wants to sweetly cornhole Nate while Sweet Home Alabama quietly plays over the grunts and squeals, then 538 is clearly wrong.
 
2012-10-29 12:11:34 PM  
i.qkme.me
 
2012-10-29 12:12:06 PM  
What I found interesting was this graph by Nate:

graphics8.nytimes.com

Basically, if you are leading in a state in the poll of polls by more than 1.5 points, you will win the state. Only ONCE in the last thirty years has someone lost a state when winning it in the polls by more than 1.5.
 
2012-10-29 12:14:04 PM  

WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.


"Nearly one-in-three Ohio voters (32%) have already cast their ballots. Obama leads 62% to 36% among these voters. "

Obama is leading 26 points in early voting and you think showing a DNC with +8 more in sampling is inaccurate?

Think about what you are saying because it would mean that a record number of Republicans are voting for Obama. What don't use just concede that Obama takes Ohio. The writing is on the wall.
 
2012-10-29 12:15:12 PM  
Does Nate Silver still have access to the Obama campaign's internal polling?
 
2012-10-29 12:15:58 PM  

guilt by association: Does Nate Silver still have access to the Obama campaign's internal polling?


I would assume so. That's the benefit of being thin and high voiced.
 
2012-10-29 12:17:12 PM  

mrshowrules: WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.

"Nearly one-in-three Ohio voters (32%) have already cast their ballots. Obama leads 62% to 36% among these voters. "

Obama is leading 26 points in early voting and you think showing a DNC with +8 more in sampling is inaccurate?

Think about what you are saying because it would mean that a record number of Republicans are voting for Obama. What don't use just concede that Obama takes Ohio. The writing is on the wall.


The conundrum is obvious. Do they continue to paint the Obama voter as lazy even though they're going out to vote early in droves? Or do they just assume that's because Obama WANTED them to be unemployed so they could vote early. The former is a failing proposition and the latter is too conspiratorial.
 
2012-10-29 12:18:07 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...


Most of the stories are from AP, but the butthurt about Yahoo being liberal!!eleventy!! are hilarious
 
2012-10-29 12:21:29 PM  
Yes, cherry picking a new poll that's higher than average is totally different from cherry picking one lower than average.

Or was this supposed to be a "That's the joke" headline?
 
2012-10-29 12:22:41 PM  

coeyagi: You are being requested to apologize on the floor. Thank you.


For what? As others have pointed out, contradictory polls are out, even today. Rasmussen R +2.
 
2012-10-29 12:24:09 PM  

LazarusLong42: Or was this supposed to be a "That's the joke" headline?


There you go.
 
2012-10-29 12:25:42 PM  
RE: Polling

538 still has the Indiana Senate race going to Mourdock. Is this because his polling data in Indiana hasn't been updated or the fine folk in Indiana appreciate Mourdock's more nuanced views on rape?
 
2012-10-29 12:26:21 PM  

mrshowrules: WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.

"Nearly one-in-three Ohio voters (32%) have already cast their ballots. Obama leads 62% to 36% among these voters. "

Obama is leading 26 points in early voting and you think showing a DNC with +8 more in sampling is inaccurate?

Think about what you are saying because it would mean that a record number of Republicans are voting for Obama. What don't use just concede that Obama takes Ohio. The writing is on the wall.


Actually, early voting figures are not looking good for Obama. In 2008, Obama won Ohio by roughly 260,000 votes.

This year, the number of early votes cast for Obama is 220,000 less than this point four years ago. Concordantly, Romney is outperforming McCain by about 30,000 early votes.

Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out. That could well be the case - and if so, that's not a positive sign for Chicago.

The Democrats always have a healthy lead in early voting - so that's not new or noteworthy. What does matter is the relative share of votes - and if Romney is closing the 2008 gap and doing better with independents than McCain did (by far!), it's hard to see how Obama can actually win without substantially improving his base turnout from 2008. And 2008 was probably a high-water mark for D turnout.

Ohio is definitely close, too close to call.
 
2012-10-29 12:26:50 PM  

Muta: RE: Polling

538 still has the Indiana Senate race going to Mourdock. Is this because his polling data in Indiana hasn't been updated or the fine folk in Indiana appreciate Mourdock's more nuanced views on rape?


According to 538, there hasn't been a new poll there since 10/11.
 
2012-10-29 12:27:30 PM  

WombatControl: Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out.


Oh, he argues that? Good for him. I'm glad he has the ability to say things.
 
2012-10-29 12:29:45 PM  

DamnYankees: WombatControl: Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out.

Oh, he argues that? Good for him. I'm glad he has the ability to say things.


Do "Election Day votes" count for more than votes by early voters? No? Then who the hell cares when the vote was cast?
 
2012-10-29 12:30:48 PM  

qorkfiend: DamnYankees: WombatControl: Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out.

Oh, he argues that? Good for him. I'm glad he has the ability to say things.

Do "Election Day votes" count for more than votes by early voters? No? Then who the hell cares when the vote was cast?


Technically no, but looking at who is voting early, I am sure Karl wants the faithful to believe that Early Voting is 3/5 a vote.
 
2012-10-29 12:33:51 PM  
WombatControl:
Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out. That could well be the case - and if so, that's not a positive sign for Chicago.

The Democrats always have a healthy lead in early voting - so that's not new or noteworthy. What does matter is the relative share of votes - and if Romney is closing the 2008 gap and doing better with independents than McCain did (by far!), it's hard to see how Obama can actually win without substantially improving his base turnout from 2008. And 2008 was probably a high-water mark for D turnout.

Ohio is definitely close, too close to call.

www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com
 
2012-10-29 12:41:13 PM  

qorkfiend: DamnYankees: WombatControl: Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out.

Oh, he argues that? Good for him. I'm glad he has the ability to say things.

Do "Election Day votes" count for more than votes by early voters? No? Then who the hell cares when the vote was cast?


If you're cannibalizing your Election Day votes, it means that you have to have an even bigger advantage in early voting to make up for the relative difference on Election Day. It means that Republicans are getting more early voters plus their turnout on Election Day. On the other side, the Democrats are just getting votes that they otherwise would get on Election Day. In short, if Rove is correct, it's a sign that the Republicans are drawing from a larger pool of voters.
 
2012-10-29 12:42:47 PM  

WombatControl: In short, if Rove is correct


I think I see your problem.
 
2012-10-29 12:42:51 PM  

coeyagi: The conundrum is obvious. Do they continue to paint the Obama voter as lazy even though they're going out to vote early in droves? Or do they just assume that's because Obama WANTED them to be unemployed so they could vote early. The former is a failing proposition and the latter is too conspiratorial.


The cognitive dissonance will be epic
 
2012-10-29 12:43:17 PM  

WombatControl: qorkfiend: DamnYankees: WombatControl: Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out.

Oh, he argues that? Good for him. I'm glad he has the ability to say things.

Do "Election Day votes" count for more than votes by early voters? No? Then who the hell cares when the vote was cast?

If you're cannibalizing your Election Day votes, it means that you have to have an even bigger advantage in early voting to make up for the relative difference on Election Day. It means that Republicans are getting more early voters plus their turnout on Election Day. On the other side, the Democrats are just getting votes that they otherwise would get on Election Day. In short, if Rove is correct, it's a sign that the Republicans are drawing from a larger pool of voters.


I was lying earlier now you're doing too much.
 
2012-10-29 12:45:17 PM  

skykid: Ohio is definitely close,


True.

too close to call.

Not true.

Obama is clearly leading there. Not by a lot, but read my info dump-17 polls, 12 showing Obama ahead, 5 ties, zero showing Romney ahead. That's a lot of polls. Smosh those polls together and you get a survey size of something like 8,000 people or more. I can say, with nearly 100% accuracy, that Obama is leading right now in Ohio.
 
2012-10-29 12:47:54 PM  
NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.
 
2012-10-29 12:51:33 PM  
Please, god, just let this election be over.
 
2012-10-29 12:53:54 PM  
For the unskewed:

Link
 
2012-10-29 12:54:18 PM  
i194.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-29 12:54:25 PM  

Muta: RE: Polling

538 still has the Indiana Senate race going to Mourdock. Is this because his polling data in Indiana hasn't been updated or the fine folk in Indiana appreciate Mourdock's more nuanced views on rape?


No polling
 
2012-10-29 12:54:50 PM  
So why are the dems cannibalizing election day voting whereas the reps are getting new voters through early voting?

Seem to me that a vote is a vote and they're both cannibalizing election day votes.
 
2012-10-29 12:56:16 PM  

Muta: RE: Polling

538 still has the Indiana Senate race going to Mourdock. Is this because his polling data in Indiana hasn't been updated or the fine folk in Indiana appreciate Mourdock's more nuanced views on rape?


The majority of Indiana is like my home state of Kentucky, the majority of both is a collective of the willfully ignorant.
 
2012-10-29 12:56:40 PM  

tony41454: NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.


Not what the polls show, but hey, whatever.
 
2012-10-29 12:59:18 PM  

WombatControl: mrshowrules: WombatControl: PPP's last Ohio poll is a joke - their whole last round of swing-state polls are a joke, in fact.

That Ohio poll has a D+8 advantage - when the wave election of 2008 saw only a D+5 advantage. (2010 was R+1 in Ohio.)

So yes, Obama would be comfortably ahead in an alternate universe where Ohio had the demographics of a reliably Democratic state. But that's not the Ohio that exists in the real world where the most likely turnout is something like D+2 or D+3 (and that's being favorable to the Democratic side and assuming that Obama's GOTV efforts do well). In that case, something like the 49-49 split from the newspaper poll is much more likely.

Rasmussen shows Romney up 2 - which if you buy the house effect argument, would also support the race being tied.

"Nearly one-in-three Ohio voters (32%) have already cast their ballots. Obama leads 62% to 36% among these voters. "

Obama is leading 26 points in early voting and you think showing a DNC with +8 more in sampling is inaccurate?

Think about what you are saying because it would mean that a record number of Republicans are voting for Obama. What don't use just concede that Obama takes Ohio. The writing is on the wall.

Actually, early voting figures are not looking good for Obama. In 2008, Obama won Ohio by roughly 260,000 votes.

This year, the number of early votes cast for Obama is 220,000 less than this point four years ago. Concordantly, Romney is outperforming McCain by about 30,000 early votes.

Karl Rove was arguing that the Democrats are cannibalizing their Election Day votes while GOP early voters are getting new voters turned out. That could well be the case - and if so, that's not a positive sign for Chicago.

The Democrats always have a healthy lead in early voting - so that's not new or noteworthy. What does matter is the relative share of votes - and if Romney is closing the 2008 gap and doing better with independents than McCain did (by far!), it's hard to see how Obama ...


McCain lost Ohio by 200,000 votes. You say Romney is up by 30,000 votes against McCain with one third already cast. So what, only up 30,000 votes. He's lucky if he gets another 60,000. He well still be shy about a 100,000 votes at this rate. Pretty farking grim for him. Plus, you are trying to hard.
 
2012-10-29 01:01:24 PM  
Well this poll is obviously the one we should all pay attention to now.

All other polls before and after this should be summarily dismissed.
 
2012-10-29 01:02:52 PM  

tony41454: NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.


Yeah slow down you guys, Romney is surging in Ohio.
 
2012-10-29 01:03:16 PM  

Muta: RE: Polling

538 still has the Indiana Senate race going to Mourdock. Is this because his polling data in Indiana hasn't been updated or the fine folk in Indiana appreciate Mourdock's more nuanced views on rape?


I'm from Indiana originally and still have lots of friends there. There was a facebook thread just a couple days ago swimming with people justifying Mourdock's view (although some of them may not actually have realized they were) because they are so die hard for the R team.
 
2012-10-29 01:08:01 PM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.


Snopes.com, how does it work?
 
2012-10-29 01:14:09 PM  

oren0: Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: When the Republican candidate OWNS voting machines, 4% is like a couple thousand code iterations.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.

Snopes.com, how does it work?


It is true that H.I.G. Capital's co-founder, Anthony Tamer, and several of H.I.G.'s managing directors once worked at Bain & Company (whose CEO was Mitt Romney); that Anthony Tamer and his wife are donors to the Romney campaign; and that H.I.G. Capital is the sixth-largest financial contributor to Romney fundraising committees; and it is true that Tagg Romney's firm, Solamere, has investments in other H.I.G. funds that are run by partners who are former Romney colleagues and current Romney fundraisers, and those partners also manage the fund invested in Hart Intercivic. That close a connection between the Romney family, Romney campaign contributors, and a provider of voting systems may raise some eyebrows, but it doesn't establish any direct ownership link between Tagg Romney and a provider of voting systems.

Thanks for clearing that up.
 
2012-10-29 01:20:24 PM  
O winning with D+8 sample. Got it. Might as well poll the NYTimes.
 
2012-10-29 01:21:59 PM  

NateGrey: WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).

So weekday polls are more accurate because Republican voters.....are at home to answer the phone?


Hey Wombat, could you clarify your "Republicans arent home on weekends" remark?

I enjoy reading derp, so make it good. Thanks
 
2012-10-29 01:22:40 PM  

Garet Garrett: O winning with D+8 sample. Got it. Might as well poll the NYTimes.


Sounds like that poll needs an unskewing.
 
2012-10-29 01:23:21 PM  

ghare: tony41454: NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.

Not what the polls show, but hey, whatever.


Add in the early voting splitting 60% to Obama with 30-33% to Romney then the remainder to a third party candidate or not telling, and Romney has a real problem in Ohio(that can only be fixed by cheating).
 
2012-10-29 01:24:25 PM  

NateGrey: NateGrey: WombatControl: Oh, and the PPP poll is a weekend sample conducted the 26th-28th. Polls conducted over a weekend traditionally undercount Republican voters (who are more likely to be at church than responding to pollsters).

So weekday polls are more accurate because Republican voters.....are at home to answer the phone?

Hey Wombat, could you clarify your "Republicans arent home on weekends" remark?

I enjoy reading derp, so make it good. Thanks


They are. They're the 47% who are lazy assholes and don't mind being called lazy assholes by Romney because he's not black.

Or something.
 
2012-10-29 01:26:01 PM  

coeyagi: Girl From The North Country: Well Ohio is New York's path to the sea, so you can see why they're in the tank for Obama.

I heard an Ohio bank provided 10% of the funding for "The Innocence of Muslims" video that was used as a red herring for the Benghazi attack, so I can understand why they're in the tank for Obama.


So, about $10?
 
2012-10-29 01:27:47 PM  

Otherwise Just Fine: coeyagi: Girl From The North Country: Well Ohio is New York's path to the sea, so you can see why they're in the tank for Obama.

I heard an Ohio bank provided 10% of the funding for "The Innocence of Muslims" video that was used as a red herring for the Benghazi attack, so I can understand why they're in the tank for Obama.

So, about $10?


Pretty much.
 
2012-10-29 01:36:16 PM  
Too bad the Democrats can't over sample Democrat voters in the actual election.

D+9 and you guys take this poll seriously?
 
2012-10-29 01:40:15 PM  

Brubold: Too bad the Democrats can't over sample Democrat voters in the actual election.

D+9 and you guys take this poll seriously?


Here's the poll of polls showing party ID as reported in the polls:

dailydish.typepad.com

Given this information, D+9 looks like an exactly right sample.
 
2012-10-29 01:42:02 PM  

Brubold: Too bad the Democrats can't over sample Democrat voters in the actual election.

D+9 and you guys take this poll seriously?


What are your polls telling you?
 
2012-10-29 01:44:12 PM  

meat0918: I_Am_Weasel: cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

You're asking for sensibility of people who choose to live in Ohio?

I can understand Eastern Ohio. It's practically Pennsylvania.

But Columbus??? Or Cincinnati? With what they call chili???


You shut your mouth about Cincinnati chili, philistine. It is meant to be served on sketti or conies.
 
2012-10-29 01:44:14 PM  
Does anyone have any good reading material regarding this whole "Sampling" BS?

The right claims they have it in the bag because of Oversampling, but I can't see any sources claiming they are wrong.
 
2012-10-29 01:45:55 PM  

Drakin030: Does anyone have any good reading material regarding this whole "Sampling" BS?

The right claims they have it in the bag because of Oversampling, but I can't see any sources claiming they are wrong.


There's not really anything to rebut - pollsters take the results as they are and just ask people what their party ID is. If it shows a lot of Democrats, conservatives whine and complain that doesn't reflect reality. It's just a dumb argument but it has traction because of wishful thinking.
 
2012-10-29 01:50:37 PM  

Drakin030: Does anyone have any good reading material regarding this whole "Sampling" BS?

The right claims they have it in the bag because of Oversampling, but I can't see any sources claiming they are wrong.


Simply put, if you call 30 people and 21 of them say they are democrats the right wants you to throw out 6 of them so that its fair. What any normal statistician would do.
 
2012-10-29 02:08:57 PM  
So if you have a poll that has a D sample of let's say +8 but the poll is tied, is that not reason to be concerned?

Basically someone saying "Yeah I'm a Democrat but I'm voting Romney"
 
2012-10-29 02:16:10 PM  
ghare

tony41454: NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.

Not what the polls show, but hey, whatever.


And just what do you think Rasmussen puts out, candy? DERP.
 
2012-10-29 02:18:07 PM  

tony41454: ghare

tony41454: NOT SO FAST:
Rasmussen released its latest survey of battleground Ohio this morning. The poll finds Romney surging into his first-ever lead in the Buckeye state. He now leads President Obama by 2 points among likely voters, 50-48. Importantly, Romney's support has crossed the critical 50% threshold. It is generally difficult for an incumbent to climb back above 50% once they have relinquished it.
Romney's lead in Ohio is within the margin of error, so the context remains extremely close. With just over a week to go, both campaigns will contest the state aggressively. But, it seems the momentum may be moving towards Romney.

Not what the polls show, but hey, whatever.

And just what do you think Rasmussen puts out, candy? DERP.


yes
 
2012-10-29 02:18:48 PM  

Drakin030: So if you have a poll that has a D sample of let's say +8 but the poll is tied, is that not reason to be concerned?

Basically someone saying "Yeah I'm a Democrat but I'm voting Romney"


What? No, the sample is not 50/50 dems/reps.

Just go to unskewedpolls.com. Its simpler.
 
2012-10-29 02:19:23 PM  

Pertifly: Please, god, just let this election be over.

 
2012-10-29 02:20:07 PM  

coeyagi: yes


There you go again. Data doesn't suit your cognition, it must be faulty.
 
2012-10-29 02:23:15 PM  

NateGrey: Drakin030: So if you have a poll that has a D sample of let's say +8 but the poll is tied, is that not reason to be concerned?

Basically someone saying "Yeah I'm a Democrat but I'm voting Romney"

What? No, the sample is not 50/50 dems/reps.

Just go to unskewedpolls.com. Its simpler.


I'm not one for satire sites, but I would like to know more about how this sampling thing works.
 
2012-10-29 02:25:40 PM  

Drakin030: I'm not one for satire sites, but I would like to know more about how this sampling thing works.


Im not sure what your question is - the sample is suppose to be random. And results of party ID are what they are.
 
2012-10-29 02:28:00 PM  

DamnYankees: Drakin030: I'm not one for satire sites, but I would like to know more about how this sampling thing works.

Im not sure what your question is - the sample is suppose to be random. And results of party ID are what they are.


So what I understand is this...

If you ask 10 people "Hey who would you vote for...."

and lets say 6 out of 10 say they are Democrat. Does that mean it's a Sample of +1 Dem?
 
2012-10-29 02:29:20 PM  

Drakin030: and lets say 6 out of 10 say they are Democrat. Does that mean it's a Sample of +1 Dem?


No, that would be +2. The shorthand of the plus sign just means Dems minus GOP. So if your sample is 6 Dem and 4 GOP, that's D+2.
 
2012-10-29 02:29:52 PM  

notShryke: coeyagi: yes

There you go again. Data doesn't suit your cognition, it must be faulty.


That one poll doesn't. Look at the poll of polls, bro, and stop cherry picking.

Or continue. I don't really care. I try not to talk to low information voters stuck in the bubble of the Fox News conglomerate of derp.
 
2012-10-29 02:31:38 PM  

DamnYankees: Drakin030: and lets say 6 out of 10 say they are Democrat. Does that mean it's a Sample of +1 Dem?

No, that would be +2. The shorthand of the plus sign just means Dems minus GOP. So if your sample is 6 Dem and 4 GOP, that's D+2.


Ok fair enough, but this is where it gets interesting.

If you have a group of people that's sampled at +8 Democrat, but the pole comes back as a tie for both Romney and Obama, is that not reason to be concerned that even with the majority being "Democrats" the race still shows up as a tie?
 
2012-10-29 02:33:48 PM  

Drakin030: If you have a group of people that's sampled at +8 Democrat, but the pole comes back as a tie for both Romney and Obama, is that not reason to be concerned that even with the majority being "Democrats" the race still shows up as a tie?


No. You need to remember that the electorate is almost always anywhere between D+5 and D+10. For the past few generations, if not longer, there have always been more Democrats than Republicans. If all Democrats all voted for the Dem candidate and all GOP always voted for the GOP candidate, the Dem would always win. So finding a tight race at D+8 is not at all surprising. It's also worth nothing that independents tend to favor the GOP - lots of people disaffected with the GOP unregistered but still remained conservative.
 
2012-10-29 02:36:43 PM  

DamnYankees: What I found interesting was this graph by Nate:

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 362x778]

Basically, if you are leading in a state in the poll of polls by more than 1.5 points, you will win the state. Only ONCE in the last thirty years has someone lost a state when winning it in the polls by more than 1.5.


Unless you're Texas, evidently.

/How was Clinton up in the polls?
 
2012-10-29 02:36:45 PM  

DamnYankees: Drakin030: If you have a group of people that's sampled at +8 Democrat, but the pole comes back as a tie for both Romney and Obama, is that not reason to be concerned that even with the majority being "Democrats" the race still shows up as a tie?

No. You need to remember that the electorate is almost always anywhere between D+5 and D+10. For the past few generations, if not longer, there have always been more Democrats than Republicans. If all Democrats all voted for the Dem candidate and all GOP always voted for the GOP candidate, the Dem would always win. So finding a tight race at D+8 is not at all surprising. It's also worth nothing that independents tend to favor the GOP - lots of people disaffected with the GOP unregistered but still remained conservative.


Ahh I see.

Okay that helps. I hear the right biatching about sampling but rather than write them off as the crazy loons that they are, I figured it would be fair to atleast look into their claim.
 
2012-10-29 02:45:42 PM  

Tyrone Slothrop: DamnYankees: What I found interesting was this graph by Nate:

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 362x778]

Basically, if you are leading in a state in the poll of polls by more than 1.5 points, you will win the state. Only ONCE in the last thirty years has someone lost a state when winning it in the polls by more than 1.5.

Unless you're Texas, evidently.

/How was Clinton up in the polls?


Clinton is (was?) a Southerner.
 
2012-10-29 02:49:02 PM  
 
2012-10-29 03:02:51 PM  

NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?


Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!
 
2012-10-29 03:16:22 PM  

machoprogrammer: NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?

Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!


4 points is not within a 3 point margin or error.
 
2012-10-29 03:23:45 PM  

mrshowrules: machoprogrammer: NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?

Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!

4 points is not within a 3 point margin or error.


Actually, it would be 2 points. The poll said "49%, with a margin of error of 3", since it turned out to be 47/51, that is a change of 2 points. Margin of error is typically radius, not the actual difference... Otherwise it would be difficult to calculate when it didn't originally predict a tie.
 
2012-10-29 03:27:05 PM  

machoprogrammer: NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?

Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!


Maybe you missed all the Fark Cons quoting the Ras Romney +2 this morning.

I dont think they were taking MOE into account there.
 
2012-10-29 04:44:01 PM  

machoprogrammer: NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?

Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!


i580.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-29 05:07:34 PM  

cman: FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?


If Ohio was full of people who could make their minds up, their votes wouldn't matter anymore.

Like most of the rest of the nation.
 
2012-10-29 05:55:02 PM  

DamnYankees: What I found interesting was this graph by Nate:

[graphics8.nytimes.com image 362x778]

Basically, if you are leading in a state in the poll of polls by more than 1.5 points, you will win the state. Only ONCE in the last thirty years has someone lost a state when winning it in the polls by more than 1.5.


Dukakis won in 1988? Huh.
 
MFL
2012-10-29 06:54:38 PM  
1. PPP always slants left.
2. Rasmussen has Romney up by 2 in Ohio today and has Romney over 50% nationally (along with Gallup, ABC/WP to name a few). Candidates polling consistently over 50% don't traditionally lose.
3. Newspapers that endorsed Obama 4 years ago are dropping like flies...writing meet wall.
4. One candidate is in attack mode searching for a soundbyte to catch fire, while the other one is giving speeches about big issues and reaching accross party lines. One is ahead, one is chasing that person.
5. Poll after poll after poll show Romney is winning independent voters by at least twice the margin Obama beat McCain...voter enthusiasm is obviously on the side of the GOP this year....this means democrats need to not only match their record turnout in 2008, but surpass it to the point it will make up for jacked GOP and the independent gap......good luck.

Hype is the one constant of Obama's presidency. Do you really think this fabled "ground game" is any different?

Obama will lose and it won't be as close as you think.
 
2012-10-29 06:55:04 PM  

mrshowrules: McCain lost Ohio by 200,000 votes. You say Romney is up by 30,000 votes against McCain with one third already cast. So what, only up 30,000 votes. He's lucky if he gets another 60,000. He well still be shy about a 100,000 votes at this rate. Pretty farking grim for him. Plus, you are trying to hard.


That's not the way it works. Romney is up 30,000 votes compared to 2008. Obama is down 220,000 - the net difference is 250,000 at this point. Which means there's a rough parity compared to 2008 - and if Romney does as well or better than McCain did with Election Day voters, he's highly likely to win. (The actual margin of victory for Obama in 2008 was about 260,000 votes in Ohio.)

DamnYankees: Drakin030: If you have a group of people that's sampled at +8 Democrat, but the pole comes back as a tie for both Romney and Obama, is that not reason to be concerned that even with the majority being "Democrats" the race still shows up as a tie?

No. You need to remember that the electorate is almost always anywhere between D+5 and D+10. For the past few generations, if not longer, there have always been more Democrats than Republicans. If all Democrats all voted for the Dem candidate and all GOP always voted for the GOP candidate, the Dem would always win. So finding a tight race at D+8 is not at all surprising. It's also worth nothing that independents tend to favor the GOP - lots of people disaffected with the GOP unregistered but still remained conservative.


The electorate is typically more like D+2 to D+3 - in 2008, which was a Democratic wave election, the electorate was only D+7. You're correct that there are more Democrats than Republicans, which is why the independent vote is crucial to winning elections.
 
2012-10-29 08:12:41 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Democrat pollster is an outlier to all the other polls.

what a surprise!!!!


God, you're dumb.
 
2012-10-29 08:39:31 PM  
Wow the right is terrified judging by the level of trolling in this thread. Keep spinning away until election day, guys. youre gonna lose.
 
2012-10-30 01:26:22 PM  

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: machoprogrammer: NateGrey: The final Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state before Election Day shows John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 49% of the vote.

Ohio Actual Results:

Obama: 51.2%
McCain: 47.2

Kind of accurate is still accurate right?

Its actually pretty close and well within the margin of error. Oh, but FAUX NEWS!11!1!!1!

[i580.photobucket.com image 197x151]


Do you know how margin of error works? Margin of error was 3%. It was off by 1.8 and 2.2%, or 2% on average. Therefore, it was within margin of error.
 
Displayed 174 of 174 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report