Bob Beckel says - It's OVER!

[Wroberson]

I guess we should start packing for China...

The polls suggest this is a close race, and close races demand attention. I for one don't buy it.
None of this polls are taking into account the exit polling of early voters.

I only have 2 numbers and no links. Minimum of 20% of the people have already voted in 40 states.

National 53% Obama 31% 12% not responding
Ohio Obama 75% Romney 25%

Then there's Wisconsin and Iowa that Obama is leading in normal polls.

Believe it if you want. Just as long as it keep the guns at home.

 

[BluePhantom]

It's over alright.

Say goodnight, Mitt.

Election Forecasts - FiveThirtyEight Blog - NYTimes.com

Silver is about as credible as the Daily Kos, dude.

There's going to be a blue Phantom on election day.

Nate Silver is The Man....

The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions—he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states—won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.

Nate Silver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah in 2008 he was very good. Then he signed on with the NYT and it's been all downhill ever since. He bases his calculations on weighting of the pollsters. Now this weighting is not based on historical accuracy, it's based on what he calls Pollster Introduced Error (or PIE). Unfortunately he refuses to release his criteria for what is PIE and what is just normal statistical error. He has been asked multiple times by multiple website and sources to divulge the information and he refuses. He also bases the weighting on whether a pollster belongs to his pet organization which is (hypocritically) an organization wherin pollsters divulge their entire statistical formulas. Those that belong to the organization he gives higher weight to because as he argues, he can check their methodology...real interesting since he refuses to release his own so people can check his.

The result is that polls like Marist and PPP which are historically WAY off in comparison to other polling agencies are now getting more weight in his calculations than organizations like Rasmussen and SUSA even though in presidential elections those two have been in the top three in terms of accuracy.

What Silver does is he recognizes that his calculations can create a bandwagon effect and, being the ridiculously biased liberal that he is, he has managed to weight his calculations so that polls with a liberal house lean get more weight then ones with a Republican lean. In doing so he can show that once you apply his weighting 2+2 does not equal four, it equals one. But when you ask to see his method for determining PIE which determines the weighting, his answer is "no, just take my word for it, and who are you to be asking questions of the almighty me anyhow?"

Now...oh about two or three days before the election he will realize that his credibility is about to be publically exposed and SUDDENLY his model will start showing Romney winning the election. That's exactly what he did in 2010 and serious poll watchers laughed our asses off because we had been calling that for months and Silver finally came around and called what was clearly obvious months ago only right before the election.

Right now Silver is still trying to convince people to back Obama because "he's the winning team and everyone wants to back the winner". Provided the polling trends continue as they have been, that'll change.

BTW....I correctly predicted 49 of the 50 states in 2008 too as did most of the rest of the serious polling geeks. Big deal...that election was EASY to call....and are you seriously using Wikipedia as a reliable reference? Unfuckingreal.

 

[Chris]

Silver is about as credible as the Daily Kos, dude.

There's going to be a blue Phantom on election day.

Nate Silver is The Man....

The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions—he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states—won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.

Nate Silver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah in 2008 he was very good. Then he signed on with the NYT and it's been all downhill ever since. He bases his calculations on weighting of the pollsters. Now this weighting is not based on historical accuracy, it's based on what he calls Pollster Introduced Error (or PIE). Unfortunately he refuses to release his criteria for what is PIE and what is just normal statistical error. He has been asked multiple times by multiple website and sources to divulge the information and he refuses. He also bases the weighting on whether a pollster belongs to his pet organization which is (hypocritically) an organization wherin pollsters divulge their entire statistical formulas. Those that belong to the organization he gives higher weight to because as he argues, he can check their methodology...real interesting since he refuses to release his own so people can check his.

The result is that polls like Marist and PPP which are historically WAY off in comparison to other polling agencies are now getting more weight in his calculations than organizations like Rasmussen and SUSA even though in presidential elections those two have been in the top three in terms of accuracy.

What Silver does is he recognizes that his calculations can create a bandwagon effect and, being the ridiculously biased liberal that he is, he has managed to weight his calculations so that polls with a liberal house lean get more weight then ones with a Republican lean. In doing so he can show that once you apply his weighting 2+2 does not equal four, it equals one. But when you ask to see his method for determining PIE which determines the weighting, his answer is "no, just take my word for it, and who are you to be asking questions of the almighty me anyhow?"

Now...oh about two or three days before the election he will realize that his credibility is about to be publically exposed and SUDDENLY his model will start showing Romney winning the election. That's exactly what he did in 2010 and serious poll watchers laughed our asses off because we had been calling that for months and Silver finally came around and called what was clearly obvious months ago only right before the election.

Right now Silver is still trying to convince people to back Obama because "he's the winning team and everyone wants to back the winner". Provided the polling trends continue as they have been, that'll change.

BTW....I correctly predicted 49 of the 50 states in 2008 too as did most of the rest of the serious polling geeks. Big deal...that election was EASY to call.

This one is easy to call also.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

 

[BluePhantom]

I guess we should start packing for China...

The polls suggest this is a close race, and close races demand attention. I for one don't buy it.
None of this polls are taking into account the exit polling of early voters.

I only have 2 numbers and no links. Minimum of 20% of the people have already voted in 40 states.

National 53% Obama 31% 12% not responding
Ohio Obama 75% Romney 25%

Then there's Wisconsin and Iowa that Obama is leading in normal polls.

Believe it if you want. Just as long as it keep the guns at home.

Early voting is totally irrelevant. It won't even make up 0.5%

 

[BluePhantom]

There's going to be a blue Phantom on election day.

Nate Silver is The Man....

The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions—he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states—won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.

Nate Silver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah in 2008 he was very good. Then he signed on with the NYT and it's been all downhill ever since. He bases his calculations on weighting of the pollsters. Now this weighting is not based on historical accuracy, it's based on what he calls Pollster Introduced Error (or PIE). Unfortunately he refuses to release his criteria for what is PIE and what is just normal statistical error. He has been asked multiple times by multiple website and sources to divulge the information and he refuses. He also bases the weighting on whether a pollster belongs to his pet organization which is (hypocritically) an organization wherin pollsters divulge their entire statistical formulas. Those that belong to the organization he gives higher weight to because as he argues, he can check their methodology...real interesting since he refuses to release his own so people can check his.

The result is that polls like Marist and PPP which are historically WAY off in comparison to other polling agencies are now getting more weight in his calculations than organizations like Rasmussen and SUSA even though in presidential elections those two have been in the top three in terms of accuracy.

What Silver does is he recognizes that his calculations can create a bandwagon effect and, being the ridiculously biased liberal that he is, he has managed to weight his calculations so that polls with a liberal house lean get more weight then ones with a Republican lean. In doing so he can show that once you apply his weighting 2+2 does not equal four, it equals one. But when you ask to see his method for determining PIE which determines the weighting, his answer is "no, just take my word for it, and who are you to be asking questions of the almighty me anyhow?"

Now...oh about two or three days before the election he will realize that his credibility is about to be publically exposed and SUDDENLY his model will start showing Romney winning the election. That's exactly what he did in 2010 and serious poll watchers laughed our asses off because we had been calling that for months and Silver finally came around and called what was clearly obvious months ago only right before the election.

Right now Silver is still trying to convince people to back Obama because "he's the winning team and everyone wants to back the winner". Provided the polling trends continue as they have been, that'll change.

BTW....I correctly predicted 49 of the 50 states in 2008 too as did most of the rest of the serious polling geeks. Big deal...that election was EASY to call.

This one is easy to call also.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

If the election were held today, probably not. But there is almost three weeks until the election and if the trends continue as they have been Romney will take Ohio. The difference between Silver and I is that I will say right now that in the end Romney will almost certainly take Ohio and Silver will wait until the last minute when there's no one left he can realistically hope to convince with his bullshit to say the same thing.

 

[Politico]

Beckel also said the consulate incident was not a planned terrorist attack and Al Qaeda does not exist.

 

[Chris]

Yeah in 2008 he was very good. Then he signed on with the NYT and it's been all downhill ever since. He bases his calculations on weighting of the pollsters. Now this weighting is not based on historical accuracy, it's based on what he calls Pollster Introduced Error (or PIE). Unfortunately he refuses to release his criteria for what is PIE and what is just normal statistical error. He has been asked multiple times by multiple website and sources to divulge the information and he refuses. He also bases the weighting on whether a pollster belongs to his pet organization which is (hypocritically) an organization wherin pollsters divulge their entire statistical formulas. Those that belong to the organization he gives higher weight to because as he argues, he can check their methodology...real interesting since he refuses to release his own so people can check his.

The result is that polls like Marist and PPP which are historically WAY off in comparison to other polling agencies are now getting more weight in his calculations than organizations like Rasmussen and SUSA even though in presidential elections those two have been in the top three in terms of accuracy.

What Silver does is he recognizes that his calculations can create a bandwagon effect and, being the ridiculously biased liberal that he is, he has managed to weight his calculations so that polls with a liberal house lean get more weight then ones with a Republican lean. In doing so he can show that once you apply his weighting 2+2 does not equal four, it equals one. But when you ask to see his method for determining PIE which determines the weighting, his answer is "no, just take my word for it, and who are you to be asking questions of the almighty me anyhow?"

Now...oh about two or three days before the election he will realize that his credibility is about to be publically exposed and SUDDENLY his model will start showing Romney winning the election. That's exactly what he did in 2010 and serious poll watchers laughed our asses off because we had been calling that for months and Silver finally came around and called what was clearly obvious months ago only right before the election.

Right now Silver is still trying to convince people to back Obama because "he's the winning team and everyone wants to back the winner". Provided the polling trends continue as they have been, that'll change.

BTW....I correctly predicted 49 of the 50 states in 2008 too as did most of the rest of the serious polling geeks. Big deal...that election was EASY to call.

This one is easy to call also.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

If the election were held today, probably not. But there is almost three weeks until the election and if the trends continue as they have been Romney will take Ohio. The difference between Silver and I is that I will say right now that in the end Romney will almost certainly take Ohio and Silver will wait until the last minute when there's no one left he can realistically hope to convince with his bullshit to say the same thing.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

 

[BluePhantom]

This one is easy to call also.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

If the election were held today, probably not. But there is almost three weeks until the election and if the trends continue as they have been Romney will take Ohio. The difference between Silver and I is that I will say right now that in the end Romney will almost certainly take Ohio and Silver will wait until the last minute when there's no one left he can realistically hope to convince with his bullshit to say the same thing.

Romney ain't winning Ohio.

Well....we'll see. I have started a lot of polling analysis threads on USMB. If you look at them you will find that everything I said would happen has happened, exactly when, how, and why I said it would; right down the line, dead square on the nose. If you want to get your panties in a bunch about Silver...knock yourself out. He only responds to what the polls say NOW and then he manipulates and biases the data to promote his personal agenda. What is happening now I predicted months ago and it's all right here on USMB for anyone to verify. If you want to be your usual liberal tool who takes positions right there with TM and has basically the same credibility, go for it. BUT.....thus far I have been right and you have been wrong. So aint it a bitch?

 

[Lovebears65]

Beckel said that? do you have a link or give us what he said?

He said it on the five on fox last night.. He said if the gallup numbers are true Obama is done.

 

[decker]

And that was before the O's appearance at the Alfred Smith gala tonite.

Mitt was on his game and his jokes were very cutting but with that smile on his face.

The O made it thru the nite but just barely. A few laughs but it was flat.

Beckel knew. The O knew.

But most importantly, Mitt knew!

Yee-haw!

doubt the dinner made a difference either way. mccain rocked the house four years ago and did not change much

but bob right. if that gallup poll is correct then no way obama can win. we just see it proved correct

 

[decker]

Beckel said that? do you have a link or give us what he said?

He said it on the five on fox last night.. He said if the gallup numbers are true Obama is done.

he is right. if the gallup polls are right. the election is over

 

[LoneLaugher]

As usual, Mitt missed the boat at hat dinner. When self deprecating humor and a couple of light jabs at the other side were called for, that dickhead issued a talking point list in snark form.

Way to go, loser.

 

[decker]

i did not think either were as funny as mccain was in 2008.

 

[Obamanation]

As usual, Mitt missed the boat at hat dinner. When self deprecating humor and a couple of light jabs at the other side were called for, that dickhead issued a talking point list in snark form.

Way to go, loser.

Yeah, it was great, huh? LMAO!!!

Obama was so mad, he looked digusted everytime he made a joke about himself. Mitt should have been even meaner. With comic license he could have gotten away with saying anything. ...and the best part was that Mitt was so much better than Obama even still!

 

[decker]

As usual, Mitt missed the boat at hat dinner. When self deprecating humor and a couple of light jabs at the other side were called for, that dickhead issued a talking point list in snark form.

Way to go, loser.

Yeah, it was great, huh? LMAO!!!

Obama was so mad, he looked digusted everytime he made a joke about himself. Mitt should have been even meaner. With comic license he could have gotten away with saying anything. ...and the best part was that Mitt was so much better than Obama even still!

i don,t think a light hearted dinner make much of difference either way. in end thrid debate will have a bigger impact

 

[LoneLaugher]

As usual, Mitt missed the boat at hat dinner. When self deprecating humor and a couple of light jabs at the other side were called for, that dickhead issued a talking point list in snark form.

Way to go, loser.

Yeah, it was great, huh? LMAO!!!

Obama was so mad, he looked digusted everytime he made a joke about himself. Mitt should have been even meaner. With comic license he could have gotten away with saying anything. ...and the best part was that Mitt was so much better than Obama even still!

Why do nutters think that they have any hope of ever being able to determine what is and is not funny?

 

[jillian]

He said it's over if the polls are correct, and he doesn't necessarily buy that they're accurate. You can't blame a guy for hoping.

Bob Beckel:

no but you can blame him for being a hack.

and for clarity... i mean the o/p... not beckel.

 

[decker]

people find different thing or same thing funny. depends on the person.

 

[francoHFW]

OP: Big if...Pubcrappe!

 

[Obamanation]

people find different thing or same thing funny. depends on the person.

Well, the people in that room sure laughed at Romney's jokes harder than Obamama's...