Obama is Cruising!!!

[Newby]

You really have to be told what No Toss Ups means? Here's an idea, maybe you should refute the OP with some actual data and not a 12 day old national poll.

Yes, please explain how the 'no toss up' numbers are arrived at? and then explain how they can be even the most slightly relevant?

Because the aggregate of polls actually shows one candidate winning but RCP doesn't put them under a candidate unless they are up over 5%. 5% is well outside the margin of error when you are aggregating multiple polls.
I
Once again, I invite you to provide data to refute what you've been shown.

That makes no sense? Are you still talking about the 'no toss up' poll? Clearly there are several states that are under the 5% margin, and they are clearly assigning them to whichever candidate they currently have showing as ahead. Your link shows 290 vs 248, that is clearly counting every electoral vote. Even if you aren't talking about the 'no toss up', there are still several states under the 5% margin.

I can link polls just like you can, it proves nothing. I never understand why when people are quoting a poll and using it as evidence that they also don't include the statistics about how a poll has been conducted. Many, many variables can be used to show a swing one way or the other. For instance, since you're so up on RCP polls, are they using 2008 turnout in any of their algorithms?

 

[Amazed]

Yes, please explain how the 'no toss up' numbers are arrived at? and then explain how they can be even the most slightly relevant?

Because the aggregate of polls actually shows one candidate winning but RCP doesn't put them under a candidate unless they are up over 5%. 5% is well outside the margin of error when you are aggregating multiple polls.
I
Once again, I invite you to provide data to refute what you've been shown.

That makes no sense? Are you still talking about the 'no toss up' poll? Clearly there are several states that are under the 5% margin, and they are clearly assigning them to whichever candidate they currently have showing as ahead. Your link shows 290 vs 248, that is clearly counting every electoral vote. Even if you aren't talking about the 'no toss up', there are still several states under the 5% margin.

I can link polls just like you can, it proves nothing. I never understand why when people are quoting a poll and using it as evidence that they also don't include the statistics about how a poll has been conducted. Many, many variables can be used to show a swing one way or the other. For instance, since you're so up on RCP polls, are they using 2008 turnout in any of their algorithms?

They've been posting the "no toss-up" maps for weeks.

 

[Newby]

To quote a line from the Magnificent 7, "You remind me of the guy I knew out in El Paso who jumped off a building. As he fell, people on every floor kept hearing him say, 'So far so good'."


Here's a dose of reality using RCP since you brought it up.

Here is Wisconsin:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Wisconsin: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Michigan:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Michigan: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Pennsylvania:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Pennsylvania: Romney vs. Obama

Here is Ohio and how close it is (it wasn't as close as I thought it was going to be):

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Ohio: Romney vs. Obama

All show the President ahead; 64 electoral votes right there.


OBAMA IS CRUISING!!!!!!!!!!

What's the margin of error? Can you list the details of who is being polled in what percentages and where? Just trying to drag you back to reality here.

Just trying to make excuses for why the Governor is behind is more like it.

In PA, all are over or right at the MOE--you'd know this if you were to look at the data skippy. I know the truth is painful to the GOP so that is why you won't look.

In MI, all are over the MOE in Obama's favor

In WI, 2 out of the 5 are inside the MOE

In OH, of the 8 different polls showing our President ahead of Governor Romney--8 polls--2 are outside of the MOE, the othe 6 are inside the MOE. The one poll--ONE POLL--showing the Governor ahead is 1/2 the margin of error in percentage points. Shock of shocks--the 1 poll showing Romney leading is a Rasmussen poll.

One good thing for the Governor is that one of the tied polls is based out of Cincinnati and suburban Cincy/Hamilton County will decide Ohio.

Let me guess, all 30 polls in 4 different states are over sampling Democrats, right?

I own you.

So, why don't you give the thread audience a breakdown of how RCP is creating the polls? Let's hear it. Pick one and show how the raw data is acquired and tabulated?

 

[Newby]

What's the margin of error? Can you list the details of who is being polled in what percentages and where? Just trying to drag you back to reality here.

Just trying to make excuses for why the Governor is behind is more like it.

In PA, all are over or right at the MOE--you'd know this if you were to look at the data skippy. I know the truth is painful to the GOP so that is why you won't look.

In MI, all are over the MOE in Obama's favor

In WI, 2 out of the 5 are inside the MOE

In OH, of the 8 different polls showing our President ahead of Governor Romney--8 polls--2 are outside of the MOE, the othe 6 are inside the MOE. The one poll--ONE POLL--showing the Governor ahead is 1/2 the margin of error in percentage points. Shock of shocks--the 1 poll showing Romney leading is a Rasmussen poll.

One good thing for the Governor is that one of the tied polls is based out of Cincinnati and suburban Cincy/Hamilton County will decide Ohio.

Let me guess, all 30 polls in 4 different states are over sampling Democrats, right?

I own you.

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Just trying to make excuses for why the Governor is behind is more like it.

In PA, all are over or right at the MOE--you'd know this if you were to look at the data skippy. I know the truth is painful to the GOP so that is why you won't look.

In MI, all are over the MOE in Obama's favor

In WI, 2 out of the 5 are inside the MOE

In OH, of the 8 different polls showing our President ahead of Governor Romney--8 polls--2 are outside of the MOE, the othe 6 are inside the MOE. The one poll--ONE POLL--showing the Governor ahead is 1/2 the margin of error in percentage points. Shock of shocks--the 1 poll showing Romney leading is a Rasmussen poll.

One good thing for the Governor is that one of the tied polls is based out of Cincinnati and suburban Cincy/Hamilton County will decide Ohio.

Let me guess, all 30 polls in 4 different states are over sampling Democrats, right?

I own you.

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

 

[Newby]

Just trying to make excuses for why the Governor is behind is more like it.

In PA, all are over or right at the MOE--you'd know this if you were to look at the data skippy. I know the truth is painful to the GOP so that is why you won't look.

In MI, all are over the MOE in Obama's favor

In WI, 2 out of the 5 are inside the MOE

In OH, of the 8 different polls showing our President ahead of Governor Romney--8 polls--2 are outside of the MOE, the othe 6 are inside the MOE. The one poll--ONE POLL--showing the Governor ahead is 1/2 the margin of error in percentage points. Shock of shocks--the 1 poll showing Romney leading is a Rasmussen poll.

One good thing for the Governor is that one of the tied polls is based out of Cincinnati and suburban Cincy/Hamilton County will decide Ohio.

Let me guess, all 30 polls in 4 different states are over sampling Democrats, right?

I own you.

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

I'm sure you'd win the "hore" race.

Obama is winning in electoral votes as I have demonstrated time and again. Your personal insults will not change that fact.

Obama isn't 'winning' in EV votes, the elections are next Tuesday. Obama is winning in PREDICTIONS about the EV votes. Post the information being used that determine what these predictions will be? How are they acquired and tabulated? What is taken into consideration? Such as 2008 voter turnout? etc...

 

[Newby]

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

He's discussing EV predictions, and ignoring anything else.

 

[AceRothstein]

Yes, please explain how the 'no toss up' numbers are arrived at? and then explain how they can be even the most slightly relevant?

Because the aggregate of polls actually shows one candidate winning but RCP doesn't put them under a candidate unless they are up over 5%. 5% is well outside the margin of error when you are aggregating multiple polls.
I
Once again, I invite you to provide data to refute what you've been shown.

That makes no sense? Are you still talking about the 'no toss up' poll? Clearly there are several states that are under the 5% margin, and they are clearly assigning them to whichever candidate they currently have showing as ahead. Your link shows 290 vs 248, that is clearly counting every electoral vote. Even if you aren't talking about the 'no toss up', there are still several states under the 5% margin.

I can link polls just like you can, it proves nothing. I never understand why when people are quoting a poll and using it as evidence that they also don't include the statistics about how a poll has been conducted. Many, many variables can be used to show a swing one way or the other. For instance, since you're so up on RCP polls, are they using 2008 turnout in any of their algorithms?

Because 5% is actually a large margin when you are aggregating multiple polls. If you are aggregating 5 polls that average out to a 3% margin for one particular candidates, odds are that person is going to win that particular state. Could all of those polls be wrong? Possibly but highly unlikely.

RCP doesn't actually poll. They use polls that others conduct and they aggregate them. Very simple stuff that a grade school kid who has learned about averaging in match class could do. They also link to the statistics about a poll.

No polls use 2008 turnout in their algorithms. They call a number of people who identify what party they belong to. The pollster then reports on this information. This lie that pollsters use turnout from previous elections has been the biggest lie told on this board for the last few months.

 

[Sarah G]

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

Not even a tiny edge. Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want. It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.

 

[candycorn]

You aren't eve intelligent enough to own yourself honey....nothing you posted proves your assertion that Bammy is "cruising".

Everything you've posted shows it is a hore race...but I don't expect an ill educated kid like you to have any integrity

I'm sure you'd win the "hore" race.

Obama is winning in electoral votes as I have demonstrated time and again. Your personal insults will not change that fact.

Obama isn't 'winning' in EV votes, the elections are next Tuesday. Obama is winning in PREDICTIONS about the EV votes. Post the information being used that determine what these predictions will be? How are they acquired and tabulated? What is taken into consideration? Such as 2008 voter turnout? etc...

Like I said, you're the guy who fell off the building and thought everything was going fine on the way down.

"If the signals are flashing and the gates are all down, and the whistle is blowing in vain, if you stay on the tracks, ignoring the facts, then you can't blame the wreck on the train." -- Greg Tamblyn (Singer/Songwriter)

Soon you'll be asking "did they call them after watching the movie, Bambi?"

 

[Newby]

Because the aggregate of polls actually shows one candidate winning but RCP doesn't put them under a candidate unless they are up over 5%. 5% is well outside the margin of error when you are aggregating multiple polls.
I
Once again, I invite you to provide data to refute what you've been shown.

That makes no sense? Are you still talking about the 'no toss up' poll? Clearly there are several states that are under the 5% margin, and they are clearly assigning them to whichever candidate they currently have showing as ahead. Your link shows 290 vs 248, that is clearly counting every electoral vote. Even if you aren't talking about the 'no toss up', there are still several states under the 5% margin.

I can link polls just like you can, it proves nothing. I never understand why when people are quoting a poll and using it as evidence that they also don't include the statistics about how a poll has been conducted. Many, many variables can be used to show a swing one way or the other. For instance, since you're so up on RCP polls, are they using 2008 turnout in any of their algorithms?

Because 5% is actually a large margin when you are aggregating multiple polls. If you are aggregating 5 polls that average out to a 3% margin for one particular candidates, odds are that person is going to win that particular state. Could all of those polls be wrong? Possibly but highly unlikely.

RCP doesn't actually poll. They use polls that others conduct and they aggregate them. Very simple stuff that a grade school kid who has learned about averaging in match class could do. They also link to the statistics about a poll.

No polls use 2008 turnout in their algorithms. They call a number of people who identify what party they belong to. The pollster then reports on this information. This lie that pollsters use turnout from previous elections has been the biggest lie told on this board for the last few months.

So you're saying that the averages of all the polls they (RCP) are using all average to a percentage greater than five percent for every state in the 'no toss up' poll? If they're averaging to a 3% margin, then they are being thrown into that candidate's total, regardless of margin of error.

I haven't looked at specifics for RCP, but they don't seem to make it easy to see exactly how they're getting their numbers, nor would I go to each poll they're using to average and research exactly how they're getting their numbers, way too much work, time and effort. Needless to say, these numbers can be influenced by many things in fine print that tend to be overlooked. And that's why when it's as close as this race is, it's silly to use a poll or an average of polls to make any proclamation, especially the one that was made in the op.

 

[candycorn]

Yawn......your assertion is that Bammy is "cruising", that its over....which may be your opinion...but there is nothing to back that up.

Its ok, ego and pride are tough things...they make you say things that simply aren't viable.

Again, we're back to the central point:

All polls (reputable ones anyway) show Obama leading in the electoral votes. None show the Governor leading.

Suck on that.

I know you think you are bing clever, but really its silly.

You think you get to decide what is "reputable" and what isn't...sorry kid it doesn't work that way.

Obama isn't "cruising" and the election isn't "over"...and no matter how you try and spin nothing you can say or post changes any of that.

The election was "over" when Romney got nominated. I think, deep down, most republicans knew that.

You'll learn on 11/6 when you unveil your new sock puppet.

 

[Newby]

I'm sure you'd win the "hore" race.

Obama is winning in electoral votes as I have demonstrated time and again. Your personal insults will not change that fact.

Obama isn't 'winning' in EV votes, the elections are next Tuesday. Obama is winning in PREDICTIONS about the EV votes. Post the information being used that determine what these predictions will be? How are they acquired and tabulated? What is taken into consideration? Such as 2008 voter turnout? etc...

Like I said, you're the guy who fell off the building and thought everything was going fine on the way down.

"If the signals are flashing and the gates are all down, and the whistle is blowing in vain, if you stay on the tracks, ignoring the facts, then you can't blame the wreck on the train." -- Greg Tamblyn (Singer/Songwriter)

Soon you'll be asking "did they call them after watching the movie, Bambi?"

Whatever, dude. Go back to your happy place.

 

[candycorn]

He doesn't understand the polls, yet uses them as if they prove something one way or the other.

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

Not even a tiny edge. Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want. It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.

It still is a good indicator--state polls. What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.

 

[Newby]

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

Not even a tiny edge. Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want. It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.

It still is a good indicator--state polls. What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.

I think the polls are fine as well, they've shown Romney overtaking Obama for the last several weeks, and the trend will continue. I just don't think they're accurately reflecting how much he is pulling ahead.

 

[Sarah G]

The current RCP numbers, as of today, show Romney with a TINY edge over obama in both the swing states and the national polls.

Not even a tiny edge. Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want. It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.

It still is a good indicator--state polls. What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.

Rasmussen hasn't been fine for a long time and this campaign season, Gallup is right up there with them.

 

[Amazed]

Again, we're back to the central point:

All polls (reputable ones anyway) show Obama leading in the electoral votes. None show the Governor leading.

Suck on that.

I know you think you are bing clever, but really its silly.

You think you get to decide what is "reputable" and what isn't...sorry kid it doesn't work that way.

Obama isn't "cruising" and the election isn't "over"...and no matter how you try and spin nothing you can say or post changes any of that.

The election was "over" when Romney got nominated. I think, deep down, most republicans knew that.

You'll learn on 11/6 when you unveil your new sock puppet.

Again with your opinion....and not one scrap of evidence to prove otherwise.

You are like a child simply screaming "Nuh-Uh"!!!!!

 

[candycorn]

Not even a tiny edge. Polling has failed us this year and it's all because the Republicans have discovered that you can take any poll and get any answer you want. It used to be a good indicator but not anymore.

It still is a good indicator--state polls. What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.

I think the polls are fine as well, they've shown Romney overtaking Obama for the last several weeks, and the trend will continue. I just don't think they're accurately reflecting how much he is pulling ahead.

In one breath: They're fine.
In the next breath; They're not accurate.

A microcosm of the 2012 GOP.

 

[candycorn]

Obama isn't 'winning' in EV votes, the elections are next Tuesday. Obama is winning in PREDICTIONS about the EV votes. Post the information being used that determine what these predictions will be? How are they acquired and tabulated? What is taken into consideration? Such as 2008 voter turnout? etc...

Like I said, you're the guy who fell off the building and thought everything was going fine on the way down.

"If the signals are flashing and the gates are all down, and the whistle is blowing in vain, if you stay on the tracks, ignoring the facts, then you can't blame the wreck on the train." -- Greg Tamblyn (Singer/Songwriter)

Soon you'll be asking "did they call them after watching the movie, Bambi?"

Whatever, dude. Go back to your happy place.

This is my happy place. Obama is cruising and you can only ask, "What were the pollsters wearing" when those who were polled deemed Obama superior to Romney?

 

[Newby]

It still is a good indicator--state polls. What has failed is that if Republicans don't like a result, they shift the rules.

If the candidate is falling behind in the polls, blame the pollsters.
If the candidate is creating gaffe after gaffe, blame the media.
If the labor numbers are beneficial to the President, accuse the BLS of cooking the books.
If the debate is decided that the President did well, blame the moderator

The polls are fine, Republican supporters are defective.

I think the polls are fine as well, they've shown Romney overtaking Obama for the last several weeks, and the trend will continue. I just don't think they're accurately reflecting how much he is pulling ahead.

In one breath: They're fine.
In the next breath; They're not accurate.

A microcosm of the 2012 GOP.

They're accurately showing the trend of Romney pulling steadily ahead, saying they're not showing the swing as strongly as it actually exists, is not saying that it's 'inaccurate'. But, whatever makes you happy dude.