On November 05 2012 23:04 Pandemona wrote: It still 50-50 in the polls?
Has the super storm bumped up any of Obama's poll points?
Also, do you think it's fair to judge someone in such an important job after just 2 years? In England they get 4, and most of the time they still have things they have not done by the end of it.
Without Gallup in the equation, Obama has a narrow lead in the polls. Of the Sunday national polls none put Romney ahead, four were tied, and nine were +Obama (eight of those were one point or more).
don't listen to these guys. The only thing you need to know about whos going to win the election is based off of how the redskins did this past sunday. That has decided more elections then their silly "polls". Obvs beacuse the redskins lost that means that Romney is going to win. also every single time the election has been held on the sixth republicans have won. From abe Lincoln to Regan.
I'm not going to let these election predictions be dictated by facts. Also wouldn't those polls having obama a point or 2 ahead still mean its a tied poll due to sampling error of like 3 to 4 percent on most of these polls?
Stick with what your gut tells you, don't let any of these academics infect you. If you had 10 polls showing the same 2 point lead with a 3% error on each, wouldn't that very likely show a lead even if they are all within the margin of error?
Yes but they're polls nonetheless. In the Netherlands for example out biggest party polled 30-35 out of 150 seats and our 2nd biggest party a little behind them. In the election the biggest got 41 seats and the 2nd biggest 38 which is a significant difference. Polls are nice but voters can still change their minds when they're about to cast their vote. I myself was still doubting until I filled in the form.
You are right that they are just polls, but there is certainly a correlation between the polls and the outcome. Sure it is not 100% and that is why we all still have to vote, but the polls are certainly a strong indicator.
an interesting psych point may be raised that although they are entirely dfferent things, 'strong indicator' and 'factual showing' have similar degree of impact on at least speculative belief.
some dopey college students will be harmed in the experiments
On November 05 2012 23:04 Pandemona wrote: It still 50-50 in the polls?
Has the super storm bumped up any of Obama's poll points?
Also, do you think it's fair to judge someone in such an important job after just 2 years? In England they get 4, and most of the time they still have things they have not done by the end of it.
Without Gallup in the equation, Obama has a narrow lead in the polls. Of the Sunday national polls none put Romney ahead, four were tied, and nine were +Obama (eight of those were one point or more).
don't listen to these guys. The only thing you need to know about whos going to win the election is based off of how the redskins did this past sunday. That has decided more elections then their silly "polls". Obvs beacuse the redskins lost that means that Romney is going to win. also every single time the election has been held on the sixth republicans have won. From abe Lincoln to Regan.
I'm not going to let these election predictions be dictated by facts. Also wouldn't those polls having obama a point or 2 ahead still mean its a tied poll due to sampling error of like 3 to 4 percent on most of these polls?
Stick with what your gut tells you, don't let any of these academics infect you. If you had 10 polls showing the same 2 point lead with a 3% error on each, wouldn't that very likely show a lead even if they are all within the margin of error?
Yes but they're polls nonetheless. In the Netherlands for example out biggest party polled 30-35 out of 150 seats and our 2nd biggest party a little behind them. In the election the biggest got 41 seats and the 2nd biggest 38 which is a significant difference. Polls are nice but voters can still change their minds when they're about to cast their vote. I myself was still doubting until I filled in the form.
We're not talking about just polls here, but aggregations of hundreds of polls.
Who knows. Maybe the redskins game will convince people to change their mind.
TBH I think the price of gas might change a lot of peoples minds. I found a place in minnesota that I got gas for less then $3 a gallon. (paid cash and got a 10 cent coupon but still)
On November 05 2012 23:53 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: I just realized - the LSU game says Obama wins and Redskins game says Romney gets more votes. What if Obama wins but Romney gains the popular vote?
EDIT: what does gas have to do with it?
Lower prices on gas makes people more happy with the current administration.
Lets be honest people we're dealing with the dumbest of the dumb who havn't decided and/or havn't voted yet.
Honestly if Romney really wanted fast votes he'd go to New York (more votes) or New Jersey (more red and getting redder and getting redder) do some grunt work with construction crews for a few hours, and pass gas to people who weren't getting power. EZ votes from a day of work.
In some ways it would be easier than a swing state because the disparity of Reps and Demos isn't too much but Obama wouldn't fight back.
On November 05 2012 23:04 Pandemona wrote: It still 50-50 in the polls?
Has the super storm bumped up any of Obama's poll points?
Also, do you think it's fair to judge someone in such an important job after just 2 years? In England they get 4, and most of the time they still have things they have not done by the end of it.
Without Gallup in the equation, Obama has a narrow lead in the polls. Of the Sunday national polls none put Romney ahead, four were tied, and nine were +Obama (eight of those were one point or more).
don't listen to these guys. The only thing you need to know about whos going to win the election is based off of how the redskins did this past sunday. That has decided more elections then their silly "polls". Obvs beacuse the redskins lost that means that Romney is going to win. also every single time the election has been held on the sixth republicans have won. From abe Lincoln to Regan.
I'm not going to let these election predictions be dictated by facts. Also wouldn't those polls having obama a point or 2 ahead still mean its a tied poll due to sampling error of like 3 to 4 percent on most of these polls?
Stick with what your gut tells you, don't let any of these academics infect you. If you had 10 polls showing the same 2 point lead with a 3% error on each, wouldn't that very likely show a lead even if they are all within the margin of error?
Yes but they're polls nonetheless. In the Netherlands for example out biggest party polled 30-35 out of 150 seats and our 2nd biggest party a little behind them. In the election the biggest got 41 seats and the 2nd biggest 38 which is a significant difference. Polls are nice but voters can still change their minds when they're about to cast their vote. I myself was still doubting until I filled in the form.
You are right that they are just polls, but there is certainly a correlation between the polls and the outcome. Sure it is not 100% and that is why we all still have to vote, but the polls are certainly a strong indicator.
Yes I agree I'm just giving an example of a situation where the polls agreed on something but were still wrong. It ain't over till it's over I guess
On November 06 2012 00:04 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Honestly if Romney really wanted fast votes he'd go to New York (more votes) or New Jersey (more red and getting redder and getting redder) do some grunt work with construction crews for a few hours, and pass gas to people who weren't getting power. EZ votes from a day of work.
In some ways it would be easier than a swing state because the disparity of Reps and Demos isn't too much but Obama wouldn't fight back.
He's not allowed to pump gas in NJ and if he cut one of these lines of people waiting for gas, he might be murdered.
On November 06 2012 00:04 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: Honestly if Romney really wanted fast votes he'd go to New York (more votes) or New Jersey (more red and getting redder and getting redder) do some grunt work with construction crews for a few hours, and pass gas to people who weren't getting power. EZ votes from a day of work.
In some ways it would be easier than a swing state because the disparity of Reps and Demos isn't too much but Obama wouldn't fight back.
Supposedly him and Ryan have been doing some stuff in NJ similar to the Soup Kitchen fiasco with Ryan back a month ago.
On November 05 2012 23:53 [UoN]Sentinel wrote: I just realized - the LSU game says Obama wins and Redskins game says Romney gets more votes. What if Obama wins but Romney gains the popular vote?
On November 05 2012 23:04 Pandemona wrote: It still 50-50 in the polls?
Has the super storm bumped up any of Obama's poll points?
Also, do you think it's fair to judge someone in such an important job after just 2 years? In England they get 4, and most of the time they still have things they have not done by the end of it.
Without Gallup in the equation, Obama has a narrow lead in the polls. Of the Sunday national polls none put Romney ahead, four were tied, and nine were +Obama (eight of those were one point or more).
don't listen to these guys. The only thing you need to know about whos going to win the election is based off of how the redskins did this past sunday. That has decided more elections then their silly "polls". Obvs beacuse the redskins lost that means that Romney is going to win. also every single time the election has been held on the sixth republicans have won. From abe Lincoln to Regan.
I'm not going to let these election predictions be dictated by facts. Also wouldn't those polls having obama a point or 2 ahead still mean its a tied poll due to sampling error of like 3 to 4 percent on most of these polls?
actually, the lsu-bama game has been an accurate predictor of the presidential election. bama means the democrats win, and they did. we'll see whose correlation is better-er.
game rigged so invalid. gg
im a tiger (well, i'm from louisiana and emory doesnt actually have a football team), but im k if them losing if it means my man barry doesnt have to move out his house.
On November 06 2012 00:19 bOneSeven wrote: I'm curious how this will turnout, can we know at CET time when does the elections conclude?
Probably not til 1:00-2:00 a.m. or so your time. It could be later depending upon how close it is. Could be earlier, too if it is a clear blowout.
Anything before 3 a.m. is still pretty wishy washy. 3 a.m. CET is 9 p.m. EST, so it is still pretty early for the manual counting in a lot of the early states. When results from Colorado and Wisconsin starts coming in, the idea of who won will be a lot clearer (Florida and the other earliest states have had only 1 to 2 hours of counting at that time!). At about 5 a.m. CET you can expect a more or less final result. So it is gonna be very late!
EPT
and if he cut one of these lines of people waiting for gas, he might be murdered.
