The parallel universe where Mitt Romney leads all polls

[Liability]

Yes or no on something that hasn't happened yet?

A yes or no on your belief of what turnout will be...

Do you BELIEVE turnout will be D+11 in Ohio on election day?

Want to try again? Just a yes or no...

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because you lib pussy defenders of the bogus polls are too cowardly to answer it.

 

[Liability]

Will D turnout in Ohio be +11? Probably not quite. Maybe +8. The difference is normal margin of error stuff.

More randomly sampled voters are now identifying themselves as Democrats. That's not bias, that's just bad news for Republicans. So they're in denial about it, and they're making up these conspiracy theories to justify their denial.

Now, turnout is a very different thing than margin of winning, but Liability and Dr. House have already demonstrated their inability to grasp such simple concepts, so there's no point in trying to walk them through it. We'll just be sure to check back with them in a month, to savor their sweet tears of sorrow.

The D turnout in Ohio is unlikely to be much higher than (if any higher than) the Republican turnout.

The Dims are justifiably demotivated.

Indys are likely to break more for the GOP candidate than for the failed Dim candidate.

The undecided voters will come down on the side of Romney.

Ohio is going into the GOP column. Why? Because Ohioans may make some mistakes, but they ain't stupid.

Some of us haven't forgotten you made these same kind of insane arguments to claim that Fred Thompson was going to win the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

The Foxnews poll in Ohio had Obama leading among Independents.

Wrong, ass breath. I supported Fred and thought that you guys were demonstrating a quite reasonable fear of what he represented. But I never claimed that he would win.

And the fact that Fred turned out to be damn lack-lustre as a campaigner did ruin any chance he otherwise should have had.

But none of that has ANYthing to do with the bogus poll results getting reported with the typical blithe lib disregard of clear faults in the methodology.

Carbuncle, as always, you remain a massively dishonest fail.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The D turnout in Ohio is unlikely to be much higher than (if any higher than) the Republican turnout.

The Dims are justifiably demotivated.

Indys are likely to break more for the GOP candidate than for the failed Dim candidate.

The undecided voters will come down on the side of Romney.

Ohio is going into the GOP column. Why? Because Ohioans may make some mistakes, but they ain't stupid.

Some of us haven't forgotten you made these same kind of insane arguments to claim that Fred Thompson was going to win the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

The Foxnews poll in Ohio had Obama leading among Independents.

Wrong, ass breath. I supported Fred and thought that you guys were demonstrating a quite reasonable fear of what he represented. But I never claimed that he would win.

And the fact that Fred turned out to be damn lack-lustre as a campaigner did ruin any chance he otherwise should have had.

But none of that has ANYthing to do with the bogus poll results getting reported with the typical blithe lib disregard of clear faults in the methodology.

Carbuncle, as always, you remain a massively dishonest fail.

You're lying, but that's on your conscience.

I gave you the unskewedpolls.com tracking poll, UNSKEWED, that said Obama is now up by 4.

You refuse to acknowledge that according to your own argument, that poll is accurate.

You lose.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A yes or no on your belief of what turnout will be...

Do you BELIEVE turnout will be D+11 in Ohio on election day?

Want to try again? Just a yes or no...

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because you lib pussy defenders of the bogus polls are too cowardly to answer it.

I answered it the other day. Try to keep up.

Now you answer my question, unless you're too big a pussy.

Is the unskewedpolls.com tracking poll accurate in your opinion?

 

[Liability]

Some of us haven't forgotten you made these same kind of insane arguments to claim that Fred Thompson was going to win the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

The Foxnews poll in Ohio had Obama leading among Independents.

Wrong, ass breath. I supported Fred and thought that you guys were demonstrating a quite reasonable fear of what he represented. But I never claimed that he would win.

And the fact that Fred turned out to be damn lack-lustre as a campaigner did ruin any chance he otherwise should have had.

But none of that has ANYthing to do with the bogus poll results getting reported with the typical blithe lib disregard of clear faults in the methodology.

Carbuncle, as always, you remain a massively dishonest fail.

You're lying, but that's on your conscience.

I gave you the unskewedpolls.com tracking poll, UNSKEWED, that said Obama is now up by 4.

You refuse to acknowledge that according to your own argument, that poll is accurate.

You lose.

No. You are lying. I proudly supported Fred. But otherwise your claims are, as always, just your dishonesty.

And I have not refused to acknowledge anything. I have maintained a consistent position. I don't place much stock in polling, generally.

But to whatever extent you think a sample of 400 or 500 or a couple of thousand "randomly" selected folks who answer the phone compares to how people will vote on Election Day (and in what party affiliation proportions), then it would make sense to use samples that more or less fairly and accurately correspond WITH the electorate of that State.

Asshole lying cocksleeves like you pretend that the oversampling of Dims is of no consequence.

You lie and you are purely laughable.

 

[Dot Com]

I think 90+% of the cons here are more anti-Obama than they are pro-Romney. The polls reflect his lackluster appeal to the eXtreme cons.

 

[Liability]

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because you lib pussy defenders of the bogus polls are too cowardly to answer it.

I answered it the other day. Try to keep up.

Now you answer my question, unless you're too big a pussy.

Is the unskewedpolls.com tracking poll accurate in your opinion?

Sorry cocksleeve, but I already answered your ignorant and dishonest question TODAY.

And no. You have not answered Dr. House.

Stop lying. Man up. Start telling the truth.

It might help if you can someday learn to even discern the truth.

 

[Liability]

I think 90+% of the cons here are more anti-Obama than they are pro-Romney. The polls reflect his lackluster appeal to the eXtreme cons.

I am more anti-Obama than I am pro-Mitt.

And?

The polls don't represent or reflect me at all. But the polling samples sure as hell DO over-sample for likely Obama supporters.

Fact. Not opinion.

 

[Liability]

Let us imagine a State with a population of exactly 1 million VOTERS (plus kids, etc who don't or cannot vote).

Let us assume that the State was 550,000 GOP in the last Presidential Election and 450,000 DIM in the last Presidential Election. For purposes of this little hypothetical, let's leave out Indys and other 3P's.

Along comes The FULLY PROFESSIONAL TELEPHONE POLLING RESEARCH COMPANY. They do some random cold calling and get 52 Dim voters to respond for every 48 GOP voters who respond.

Instead of the figures being used to calculate the likely voter outcome on Election Day being roughly 55 R to 45 D, the SAMPLE for the poll goes the OTHER way entirely and has it 52 D to 48 R.

After the numbers from that poll, with those samples, get crunched, the poll "shows" the incumbent Democrat President "leading" the race in that State.

Come election day, would the USMB die hard lib Dims be SHOCKED or suicidal when Romney, instead, wins that State, walking away?

 

[Dr.House]

A yes or no on your belief of what turnout will be...

Do you BELIEVE turnout will be D+11 in Ohio on election day?

Want to try again? Just a yes or no...

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because he is too stupid to realize how polling works.

I know plenty, fucknut...

Do you believe a poll that samples D+11 is a true representation of what turnout will be on election night?

 

[Dr.House]

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because you lib pussy defenders of the bogus polls are too cowardly to answer it.

I answered it the other day. Try to keep up.

Link?

Or you can just post your yes or no answer here...

 

[AceRothstein]

Why do you keep asking that question?

Because he is too stupid to realize how polling works.

I know plenty, fucknut...

Do you believe a poll that samples D+11 is a true representation of what turnout will be on election night?

The polls aren't asking how those surveyed are registered, they are asking them to answer which party they identify with at this time. They don't start polling saying they are going to survey +11 Dem, +11 Dem is the result of the surveys. Generally the demographics they try to hit are age, race and sex.

So I don't expect Dem turnout to be that high on election night but it doesn't have to be.

 

[Dr.House]

Because he is too stupid to realize how polling works.

I know plenty, fucknut...

Do you believe a poll that samples D+11 is a true representation of what turnout will be on election night?

The polls aren't asking how those surveyed are registered, they are asking them to answer which party they identify with at this time. They don't start polling saying they are going to survey +11 Dem, +11 Dem is the result of the surveys. Generally the demographics they try to hit are age, race and sex.

You do know what weighting means, right? You do know why pollsters do that, right?

Taking a survey where the results were clearly skewed to one side and claiming that is a true indication of how far ahead 0bama is if the election were held today is laughable...

So I don't expect Dem turnout to be that high on election night but it doesn't have to be.

Then you cannot believe 0bama is up by 10 pts in Ohio...

 

[AceRothstein]

I know plenty, fucknut...

Do you believe a poll that samples D+11 is a true representation of what turnout will be on election night?

The polls aren't asking how those surveyed are registered, they are asking them to answer which party they identify with at this time. They don't start polling saying they are going to survey +11 Dem, +11 Dem is the result of the surveys. Generally the demographics they try to hit are age, race and sex.

You do know what weighting means, right? You do know why pollsters do that, right?

Taking a survey where the results were clearly skewed to one side and claiming that is a true indication of how far ahead 0bama is if the election were held today is laughable...

So I don't expect Dem turnout to be that high on election night but it doesn't have to be.

Then you cannot believe 0bama is up by 10 pts in Ohio...

They don't weight by party, they weight by the other demographics I mentioned. It isn't the pollster's fault that more respondents are identifying as Dems.

Sure, he can be up 10. The polls may be reaching independents identifying themselves as Dems during the surveys. Crazy how most of the pollsters are finding similar numbers.

Obama doesn't need to win by 10 though, a 1 point win works just as well and wins him the election.

 

[rdean]

Trickle down works in that universe and Iraqis want to be just like us.

 

[Article 15]

House Gimp, are you ready to bet on Romney yet?

 

[Article 15]

Liability, you can't possibly believe what you are trying to sell but when you are in loser leaves town bet I suppose you might as well talk as much trash as you can because you wont have to eat your words when you inevitably lose.

 

[Toro]

LOL.

Another pathetic attempt by Carbuncle.

I don't accept ANY current polling as valid. I also don't go about simply rejecting polls just because I do not like what they presently show.

I would say AGAIN that the unskewed polling results are likely to be a better snapshot than the skewed polls.

I see no reason to accept the "result" of any poll when I know already that the sample used to craft the poll is skewed.

I understand why you would choose to embrace such shit, though,

The RCP average in the last four days of the 08 election were off by 1% of the actual vote. The methodologies are not flawless but generally are valid.

No methodology that oversamples D's by 8-11 is valid... No methodology that samples independents at 1% is valid...

There is nothing pointing to 0bama having more support this year than he did in 2008 and R's dropping support...

All of the polls have independents at 1%?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

House Gimp, are you ready to bet on Romney yet?

 

[Toro]

I'm willing to bet that the RCP average is within 2% of the final vote tally no matter who wins.

I think this is just conservatives in an absolute state of disbelief, unable to process that Obama could be reelected. Anyone who thinks that Obama can't win because he's a bad President is in total denial.