Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win

[auditor0007]

Amazing

Completely opposite of how it will turn out

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Hmmmm, let's review.

On the one hand, academic, peer reviewed, research that has successfully predicted every election since 1980.

On the other, polls.

I know which I lean towards.

The problem with the model is that it was set up after the fact, not before. What they do is find a set of circumstances that works for all past elections, and then they say it is a guaranteed predictor of future happenings. We see this with trends in sports gambling all the time. On Monday night football, the home underdog who lost their last three games on the road has not lost in this situation for the last ten years, so we can now predict that a very bad team is going to win or cover the spread on a Monday night game. The problem with it is that it's just a trend, and sooner or later that trend doesn't pan out. Just ask all the sports gamblers who have lost betting on trends.

 

[NYcarbineer]

People are claiming these 2 guys have been predicting elections with this model since 1980.

One of them was in college in 1980, and the other one looks like he might be 50 at the oldest.

btw, for you 'nuts a slow on the draw, 1980 was 32 years ago.

 

[rightwinger]

Amazing

Completely opposite of how it will turn out

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Hmmmm, let's review.

On the one hand, academic, peer reviewed, research that has successfully predicted every election since 1980.

On the other, polls.

I know which I lean towards.

The problem with the model is that it was set up after the fact, not before. What they do is find a set of circumstances that works for all past elections, and then they say it is a guaranteed predictor of future happenings. We see this with trends in sports gambling all the time. On Monday night football, the home underdog who lost their last three games on the road has not lost in this situation for the last ten years, so we can now predict that a very bad team is going to win or cover the spread on a Monday night game. The problem with it is that it's just a trend, and sooner or later that trend doesn't pan out. Just ask all the sports gamblers who have lost betting on trends.

One thing Republicans ignore is there has not been a similar economic collapse since the 1930s. FDR had no problem getting reelected. He did it three times

How does the University of Colorado model work for 1936, 1940 and 1944?

 

[Leweman]

People are claiming these 2 guys have been predicting elections with this model since 1980.

One of them was in college in 1980, and the other one looks like he might be 50 at the oldest.

btw, for you 'nuts a slow on the draw, 1980 was 42 years ago.

Wow it was? That makes me a lot older than I thought.

 

[skookerasbil]

According to their updated analysis, Romney is projected to receive 330 of the total 538 Electoral College votes. President Barack Obama is expected to receive 208 votes -- down five votes from their initial prediction -- and short of the 270 needed to win.

The new forecast by political science professors Kenneth Bickers of CU-Boulder and Michael Berry of CU Denver is based on more recent economic data than their original Aug. 22 prediction. The model itself did not change.

Updated election forecasting model still points to Romney win, University of Colorado study says | University of Colorado Boulder

And this was BEFORE Mitt Romney got to show who he really is by destroying Obama in the debate.

Dang..........I was just looking for that update two nights ago and couldnt find it. Yup.......before it was 320-211.......and I heard the guy interviewed in mid-August and he said that if the Sept numbers were bad, it could get even worse for the president.


James Carville said it very well back in 1992 didnt he............oh.........and Im telling you!!! This place is going to be a fucking morgue around here on election night and damn if I havent been waiting for this for 3 years!!!

There are about 10 k00k assholes in particular on this forum that Im going to have the utmost pleasure in rubbing the salt in the deep, open wound. These are going to be the most miserable fucks on the planet, and we all know who those assholes are. And dollar to a stale donut one of these mental cases goes and offs themselves post-election. Which would suck because I love publically humiliating the real nutters.


This is going to be like 20 birthdays put together in one night

 

[skookerasbil]

w0w.......this thread sure petered out quick. The k00ks could run away fast enough.


Current tally = 320 =201........FTMFW.


And oh..........Oh...........lets see. The new numbers are in on the economy this AM!!!

Well.........Im laughing..........these guys from Colorado would have to be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off their model for Obama to win. And lets see........theyve been wrong exactly how many times in the last 9 elections?


Ummm.............ZERO!!!!


But we're all real sure that REALCLEAR is spot on!!!!

 

[rightwinger]

Amazing

Completely opposite of how it will turn out

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

Hmmmm, let's review.

On the one hand, academic, peer reviewed, research that has successfully predicted every election since 1980.

On the other, polls.

I know which I lean towards.

The problem with the model is that it was set up after the fact, not before. What they do is find a set of circumstances that works for all past elections, and then they say it is a guaranteed predictor of future happenings. We see this with trends in sports gambling all the time. On Monday night football, the home underdog who lost their last three games on the road has not lost in this situation for the last ten years, so we can now predict that a very bad team is going to win or cover the spread on a Monday night game. The problem with it is that it's just a trend, and sooner or later that trend doesn't pan out. Just ask all the sports gamblers who have lost betting on trends.

The model assumes that the economy is the only factor that determines who will win the election

In reality......The cooler guy wins

 

[Salt Jones]

w0w.......this thread sure petered out quick. The k00ks could run away fast enough.


Current tally = 320 =201........FTMFW.


And oh..........Oh...........lets see. The new numbers are in on the economy this AM!!!

Well.........Im laughing..........these guys from Colorado would have to be waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off their model for Obama to win. And lets see........theyve been wrong exactly how many times in the last 9 elections?


Ummm.............ZERO!!!!


But we're all real sure that REALCLEAR is spot on!!!!

Why do white conservatives think people are scared of them? The will be proven wrong, we have a month to go. You aren't changing your minds, we aren't changing our minds; so why rehash the model. Unless you want to breakdown every data point they used and find a counterpoint?

 

[Old Rocks]

President Obama 332 Governor Romney 206

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

President Obama 5.4 Governor Romney -1.2

RealClearPolitics - Obama & Romney: Favorable/Unfavorable


General Election: Romney vs. Obama Oct.4

Gallup Tracking

Obama 49, Romney 45

Obama +4



General Election: Romney vs. Obama

Rasmussen Tracking

Obama 49, Romney 47

Obama +2

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[AceRothstein]

Do you ever make a post without a lame picture with terrible quotation bubbles?

 

[skookerasbil]

Look.....Im just trying to insulate some of the k00ks on here who are falling prey to the distractions of the media, including Fox News and CNN pushing all the bogus polling based upon weighted measures and opinions of people who arent going to go within 10 miles of a polling place on election day. The naive of the world buy this shit hook, line and stinker.


Because lets face it.......some of these people are going to be on the verge of suicidal by the time we are carving turkeys. And I have too much fun on here for even one of them to go off themselves over a stupid ass election. Not worth it s0ns.............Realville sucks and I had to visit it 4 years ago. Its sucked the big one but my guys screwed up. Now your guy screwed up.


And this is not rocket science.......bottom line is, if you are under 50% approval, you get your ass schooled in the general election without a viable third party nominee.

 

[skookerasbil]

Do you ever make a post without a lame picture with terrible quotation bubbles?

Here ya go s0n.................

 

[AceRothstein]

Look.....Im just trying to insulate some of the k00ks on here who are falling prey to the distractions of the media, including Fox News and CNN pushing all the bogus polling based upon weighted measures and opinions of people who arent going to go within 10 miles of a polling place on election day. The naive of the world buy this shit hook, line and stinker.


Because lets face it.......some of these people are going to be on the verge of suicidal by the time we are carving turkeys. And I have too much fun on here for even one of them to go off themselves over a stupid ass election. Not worth it s0ns.............Realville sucks and I had to visit it 4 years ago. Its sucked the big one but my guys screwed up. Now your guy screwed up.


And this is not rocket science.......bottom line is, if you are under 50% approval, you get your ass schooled in the general election without a viable third party nominee.

3 things

1. Polls have been pretty damn accurate over the last few elections, specifically RCP and Five Thirty Eight. They aren't going to be anywhere close to 10 miles off, maybe fractions of a point.
2. Obama's approval isn't under 50% any longer.
3. Any model that shows Romney winning Minnesota should be treated as a joke.

 

[skookerasbil]

Look.....Im just trying to insulate some of the k00ks on here who are falling prey to the distractions of the media, including Fox News and CNN pushing all the bogus polling based upon weighted measures and opinions of people who arent going to go within 10 miles of a polling place on election day. The naive of the world buy this shit hook, line and stinker.


Because lets face it.......some of these people are going to be on the verge of suicidal by the time we are carving turkeys. And I have too much fun on here for even one of them to go off themselves over a stupid ass election. Not worth it s0ns.............Realville sucks and I had to visit it 4 years ago. Its sucked the big one but my guys screwed up. Now your guy screwed up.


And this is not rocket science.......bottom line is, if you are under 50% approval, you get your ass schooled in the general election without a viable third party nominee.

3 things

1. Polls have been pretty damn accurate over the last few elections, specifically RCP and Five Thirty Eight. They aren't going to be anywhere close to 10 miles off, maybe fractions of a point.
2. Obama's approval isn't under 50% any longer.
3. Any model that shows Romney winning Minnesota should be treated as a joke.

I'll go with the guys who are right 100% of the time s0n!!!

 

[rightwinger]

Look.....Im just trying to insulate some of the k00ks on here who are falling prey to the distractions of the media, including Fox News and CNN pushing all the bogus polling based upon weighted measures and opinions of people who arent going to go within 10 miles of a polling place on election day. The naive of the world buy this shit hook, line and stinker.


Because lets face it.......some of these people are going to be on the verge of suicidal by the time we are carving turkeys. And I have too much fun on here for even one of them to go off themselves over a stupid ass election. Not worth it s0ns.............Realville sucks and I had to visit it 4 years ago. Its sucked the big one but my guys screwed up. Now your guy screwed up.


And this is not rocket science.......bottom line is, if you are under 50% approval, you get your ass schooled in the general election without a viable third party nominee.

3 things

1. Polls have been pretty damn accurate over the last few elections, specifically RCP and Five Thirty Eight. They aren't going to be anywhere close to 10 miles off, maybe fractions of a point.
2. Obama's approval isn't under 50% any longer.
3. Any model that shows Romney winning Minnesota should be treated as a joke.

Polls are like science to Republicans

If they don't match your agenda....just claim they are fake

 

[AceRothstein]

Look.....Im just trying to insulate some of the k00ks on here who are falling prey to the distractions of the media, including Fox News and CNN pushing all the bogus polling based upon weighted measures and opinions of people who arent going to go within 10 miles of a polling place on election day. The naive of the world buy this shit hook, line and stinker.


Because lets face it.......some of these people are going to be on the verge of suicidal by the time we are carving turkeys. And I have too much fun on here for even one of them to go off themselves over a stupid ass election. Not worth it s0ns.............Realville sucks and I had to visit it 4 years ago. Its sucked the big one but my guys screwed up. Now your guy screwed up.


And this is not rocket science.......bottom line is, if you are under 50% approval, you get your ass schooled in the general election without a viable third party nominee.

3 things

1. Polls have been pretty damn accurate over the last few elections, specifically RCP and Five Thirty Eight. They aren't going to be anywhere close to 10 miles off, maybe fractions of a point.
2. Obama's approval isn't under 50% any longer.
3. Any model that shows Romney winning Minnesota should be treated as a joke.

I'll go with the guys who are right 100% of the time s0n!!!

You and the University of Colorado should be prepared to be disappointed.

 

[Leweman]

3 things

1. Polls have been pretty damn accurate over the last few elections, specifically RCP and Five Thirty Eight. They aren't going to be anywhere close to 10 miles off, maybe fractions of a point.
2. Obama's approval isn't under 50% any longer.
3. Any model that shows Romney winning Minnesota should be treated as a joke.

I'll go with the guys who are right 100% of the time s0n!!!

You and the University of Colorado should be prepared to be disappointed.

Or you should be prepared to be dissapointed ... ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh. take that. I'm just as right as you. How do you like that? In your face!

 

[skookerasbil]

The k00ks dont like to look at the U Colorado model.........its a direct ball kick, thats why. They look at the economy for each individual state and have called between 45 to 48 states correctly.......INVARIABLY..........for 9 elections. Their model would have to be off on a huge scale for Obama to pick up the 270 electoral votes.


Of course, their model could be off wildly this time after being 100% accurate since 1980!!!!


Could be..............

 

[Leweman]

The k00ks dont like to look at the U Colorado model.........its a direct ball kick, thats why. They look at the economy for each individual state and have called between 45 to 48 states correctly.......INVARIABLY..........for 9 elections. Their model would have to be off on a huge scale for Obama to pick up the 270 electoral votes.


Of course, their model could be off wildly this time after being 100% accurate since 1980!!!!


Could be..............

They don't factor in how much the President lies and is aided by so much of the media.