2012 Presidential Election: TGG's 50 States Calls

[Statistikhengst]

I'm sure you willfully ignore that it's rigged. All of the sudden, no swing state was close, and 90 plus percent of ghettos were voting? Yea, cos that's how things really work. You enjoy your hollow victory, dude. I don't care. I know I wasn't off.

Only, polling was showing Obama wins in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Iowa and Virginia, all of which he won.

Polling showed an almost perfect tie in Florida, which he won by +0.88%.

Polling showed Romney slightly ahead in North Carolina. Romney won in North Carolina.

A number of swing states were indeed quite close: FL, OH, VA. PA, NH and CO were +5 wins. Nevada and IA were +6 wins. WI was a +7 win (it wasn't ever really a battleground) and MN was a +8 win (it was never a battleground, that was all smoke and mirrors from some crappy RW pollsters with bad reputations).

In other words, as usually happens in elections, even in relatively close elections, the battleground states tend to fall like dominoes for the winning candidate. See: 2004, for instance. Same thing, only in red.

Skewed, skewed, skewed, you cry!!!

The polling was right. YOU were wrong.

LIES.

In the first place; the results totally defied the pre-election polls. In the second place, polls are not all that dependable.

False. The aggregates were mostly very correct and almost all of the exit polls were spot-on.

Enjoy your butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

 

[Nyvin]

Only, polling was showing Obama wins in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Iowa and Virginia, all of which he won.

Polling showed an almost perfect tie in Florida, which he won by +0.88%.

Polling showed Romney slightly ahead in North Carolina. Romney won in North Carolina.

A number of swing states were indeed quite close: FL, OH, VA. PA, NH and CO were +5 wins. Nevada and IA were +6 wins. WI was a +7 win (it wasn't ever really a battleground) and MN was a +8 win (it was never a battleground, that was all smoke and mirrors from some crappy RW pollsters with bad reputations).

In other words, as usually happens in elections, even in relatively close elections, the battleground states tend to fall like dominoes for the winning candidate. See: 2004, for instance. Same thing, only in red.

Skewed, skewed, skewed, you cry!!!

The polling was right. YOU were wrong.

LIES.

In the first place; the results totally defied the pre-election polls. In the second place, polls are not all that dependable.

False. The aggregates were mostly very correct and almost all of the exit polls were spot-on.

Enjoy your butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

Rather Annoying.

But anyway...I guess you could say 63 votes...but if a collection of states with a combined 63 votes switched over to Romney, Obama would've lost. That's what I was getting at. "Won by" is different from "Beat Romney by"

 

[Statistikhengst]

LIES.

In the first place; the results totally defied the pre-election polls. In the second place, polls are not all that dependable.

False. The aggregates were mostly very correct and almost all of the exit polls were spot-on.

Enjoy your butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

Rather Annoying.

But anyway...I guess you could say 63 votes...but if a collection of states with a combined 63 votes switched over to Romney, Obama would've lost. That's what I was getting at. "Won by" is different from "Beat Romney by"

Oh, understand. But 63 is definitely not the margin. It is the number Romney would have needed to reverse that margin to his advantage (FL 29 + OH 18 + VA 13 + NH 4 = 64).....

 

[Nyvin]

False. The aggregates were mostly very correct and almost all of the exit polls were spot-on.

Enjoy your butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

Rather Annoying.

But anyway...I guess you could say 63 votes...but if a collection of states with a combined 63 votes switched over to Romney, Obama would've lost. That's what I was getting at. "Won by" is different from "Beat Romney by"

Oh, understand. But 63 is definitely not the margin. It is the number Romney would have needed to reverse that margin to his advantage (FL 29 + OH 18 + VA 13 + NH 4 = 64).....

Sure, whatever you say.

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

Rather Annoying.

But anyway...I guess you could say 63 votes...but if a collection of states with a combined 63 votes switched over to Romney, Obama would've lost. That's what I was getting at. "Won by" is different from "Beat Romney by"

Oh, understand. But 63 is definitely not the margin. It is the number Romney would have needed to reverse that margin to his advantage (FL 29 + OH 18 + VA 13 + NH 4 = 64).....

Sure, whatever you say.

Not trying to upset you, but 63 was NOT the EC margin in 2012. 126 was the EC margin. You meant 63 as the magic number of EV that Romney would have needed to negate the margin of +126.

You wrote:


"He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes"

the word "by" assumes a margin, either raw, or percentile, when applied to election stats.

It's really that simple.

 

[konradv]

The new stuff is great, but every once in a while it's nice to dust off the golden oldies.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Only, polling was showing Obama wins in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Iowa and Virginia, all of which he won.

Polling showed an almost perfect tie in Florida, which he won by +0.88%.

Polling showed Romney slightly ahead in North Carolina. Romney won in North Carolina.

A number of swing states were indeed quite close: FL, OH, VA. PA, NH and CO were +5 wins. Nevada and IA were +6 wins. WI was a +7 win (it wasn't ever really a battleground) and MN was a +8 win (it was never a battleground, that was all smoke and mirrors from some crappy RW pollsters with bad reputations).

In other words, as usually happens in elections, even in relatively close elections, the battleground states tend to fall like dominoes for the winning candidate. See: 2004, for instance. Same thing, only in red.

Skewed, skewed, skewed, you cry!!!

The polling was right. YOU were wrong.

LIES.

In the first place; the results totally defied the pre-election polls. In the second place, polls are not all that dependable.

False. The aggregates were mostly very correct and almost all of the exit polls were spot-on.

Enjoy your butthurt.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

It's not butthurt. It's understanding reality for what it is. There's a reason the talk was of swing states; and why both sides felt good about their chances; and it wasn't because Obama was projected to handily win all those swing states. Again, you see what you want to see. And you shouldn't pretend that Obama and his minions are above the fray in the second place.

LESS HERO WORSHIP; MORE ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY.

He won by 5 million popular votes and 62 electoral votes....how did he possibly rig all of that? What kind of national operation do you run to pull off a heist of that magnitude?

To top it off in a good number of the swing states that he won, Republicans had total control of the state government...including Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Florida, the biggest swing states of all...

He won by almost 5,000,000 votes, which translates into +3.86% margin. And his margin in the electoral college was +126 EV, not 62.

Not all that relevant to the obvious cheating in the swing states.