EPTI'd bet less than 5%.
President Obama Re-Elected - Page 1206
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
I'd bet less than 5%. | ||
|
FeUerFlieGe
United States1193 Posts
| ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:34 coverpunch wrote: What % of people who have bad things to say about Fox News have ever watched more than a cherry-picked Youtube clip's worth of it? I'd bet less than 5%. the thing is, I can understand calling bias. I can also understand thinking their opinion guys like O'Rielly and Hannity are hacks. but they are a legitimate news org. with legit reporters when they are not doing opinion pieces. of course, one shouldn't get ones news from any one source. Fox News or BBC, you gotta get additional sources either way. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
Final projections of 2008 election In the final update of his presidential forecast model at midday of November 4, 2008, Silver projected a popular vote victory by 6.1 percentage points for Barack Obama and electoral vote totals of 349 (based on a probabilistic projection) or 353 (based on fixed projections of each state).[27]. Obama won with 365 electoral college votes, Silver's predictions matching the actual results everywhere except in Indiana and the 2nd congressional district of Nebraska, which awards an electoral vote separately from the rest of the state. His projected national popular vote differential was below the actual figure of 7.2 points. 2010 Senate Of the 37 Senate seats contested in the November 2, 2010 elections, 36 were resolved by November 4, including very close outcomes in several states. Of these 36, the FiveThirtyEight model had correctly predicted the winner in 34. One of the two misses was in Colorado, in which the incumbent Michael Bennet (D) outpolled the challenger Ken Buck (R) by less than 1 percentage point. The 538 model had forecast that Buck would win by 1 percentage point. The second miss was in Nevada, in which the incumbent Harry Reid beat challenger Sharron Angle by 5.5 percentage points, whereas the 538 model had forecast Angle to win by 3.0 percentage points. Silver's model has underrated Democrats in both elections it has been used in, for those who say Silver is biased and overrates Democrats with his model. | ||
|
Praetorial
United States4241 Posts
| ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
Popular vote will go to Romney. Electoral vote will go to Obama. Gary Johnson will get ~4% of the vote, just shy of the magical 5% for the benefits of the other major parties.  Bleh.On November 06 2012 09:40 Praetorial wrote: + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rGaE5je7vE&feature=share I was giggling like mad until he specified whose campaign he supported. *sigh* Was hoping he'd stay neutral in the ad at least.... | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:36 FeUerFlieGe wrote: Lol the next southpark episode this wednesday is called "Obama Wins" Lol, Their previous episode about the usa elections in 2008 was awesome, (obama and mc cain stealing the hope diamond) maybe its a sort of sequel to that. also think electoral to obama and popular to romney. Gary johnson (who?) i expect to get less then 1%. People wil want make their vote count in this situation and therefor not vote 3rd party i imagine. | ||
|
FeUerFlieGe
United States1193 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:41 cLAN.Anax wrote: Last-minute predictions: Popular vote will go to Romney. Electoral vote will go to Obama. Gary Johnson will get ~4% of the vote, just shy of the magical 5% for the benefits of the other major parties. Bleh.I think both popular and electoral vote is going to Obama. As far as Gary Johnson, I pray he gets his 5%. I'm hoping many peoples dissatisfaction with both candidates encourages more people to vote third party. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18818 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:34 coverpunch wrote: What % of people who have bad things to say about Fox News have ever watched more than a cherry-picked Youtube clip's worth of it? I'd bet less than 5%. I try and watch a couple hours a week, usually America's News HQ and one of the round table shows, though I've seen most of their programming at least a bit. I think every bit of it is absolutely garbage and politically pointed, especially when neocons say things like "Oh, but they do serious news!" in reference to some political "mining" story looking for the Golden Nugget that will buy your way into America's heart (the truth on Benghazi, oh my!). And just you wait, it's time for indiscriminate racism come off election cycle, mostly of the character of anti-Islamic fearmongering and xenophobic puffery. When at least 4 shows on a network centerpiece a bit on how Sharia law is already creeping into the US, I'm sorry, but that makes that network terrible. | ||
|
Jaaaaasper
United States10225 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:34 coverpunch wrote: What % of people who have bad things to say about Fox News have ever watched more than a cherry-picked Youtube clip's worth of it? I'd bet less than 5%. I have watched far more than i like due to relatives who only pick one news source and choose fox news, and the opinion pieces are as bad as people say, but some of the reporting is less biased than people assume. The problem is that they do endorse the hyper partisan, not very attached to facts, and inflammatory opinion pieces, meaning they will never escape the opinion of massive bias, in part because it it deserved, and in part because of the assumption that they are biased. That is not to say that other news sources are not biased just as much or more so, but fox news is very nearly as biased as it is made out to be. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43769 Posts
On November 06 2012 08:41 Mazzi wrote: Not voting because my vote doesnt matter. But Obama will win no doubt It's time... for the BARACK ATTACK! | ||
|
BlackVelvet
51 Posts
| ||
p4NDemik
United States13896 Posts
288,550 troops were deployed overseas in Sept. 2008 196,248 troops were deployed overseas in Dec. 2011 (most recent date I could find) Someone tell me if I suck at math but that's a 31.9% reduction between those two dates. If we account for the additional 23,000 troops that were supposed to be out of Afghanistan by this summer that bring the number of deployed troops to: ~173,000 trops deployed overseas as of August 2012 (est.) That's a ~40% drop in troop deployment levels. So the drop in troop deployment does not account for the total drop in absentee ballot requests, though it does account for a lot of it. 70% is an artificially high number, misleading, and is poor journalism. That said there is still a drop that cannot be directly attributed to overall national troop withdrawl. Maybe there are more troops who are home in those states now as opposed to other states. Maybe there are other factors. Bottom line though this is being blown out of proportion. Less absentee ballots in some respect is a great sign - those troops are home and out of harm's way. Don't freak out people. edit: They are also narrowing their focus within the military just to these states, which might be experiencing even greater loss of troop numbers due to increased regional dissatisfaction with the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I don't have the exact number in front of me, but recruit numbers in these swing states have to be significantly lower now than in the early 2000's when these wars started. Regional support of and willingness to fight in these conflicts inevitably varies. There are so many factors that this article isn't taking into account it isn't even funny. Most of the article includes excerpts from a very enthused activist and does not look into factors like troop withdrawal, changing troop recruitment levels, etc. | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:41 cLAN.Anax wrote: Last-minute predictions: Popular vote will go to Romney. Electoral vote will go to Obama. Gary Johnson will get ~4% of the vote, just shy of the magical 5% for the benefits of the other major parties. Bleh.I was giggling like mad until he specified whose campaign he supported. *sigh* Was hoping he'd stay neutral in the ad at least.... I think you're overvaluing Johnson. My predictions: Obama 303, Romney 235 Obama 50.5%, Romney 48.4%, Johnson 0.8%, Stein 0.2% Republicans win House by a large margin. Democrats control Senate by a small margin. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:45 farvacola wrote: I try and watch a couple hours a week, usually America's News HQ and one of the round table shows, though I've seen most of their programming at least a bit. I think every bit of it is absolutely garbage and politically pointed, especially when neocons say things like "Oh, but they do serious news!" in reference to some political "mining" story looking for the Golden Nugget that will buy your way into America's heart (the truth on Benghazi, oh my!). And just you wait, it's time for indiscriminate racism come off election cycle, mostly of the character of anti-Islamic fearmongering and xenophobic puffery. When at least 4 shows on a network centerpiece a bit on how Sharia law is already creeping into the US, I'm sorry, but that makes that network terrible. I've noticed a very strong correlation between one's political persuasion and the degree to which one says Fox News is biased or not. most conservatives or right-leaning moderates will say that Fox News is either relatively unbiased, or moderately biased. most left-leaning moderates and liberals will say that Fox News is either very biased, or ridiculously biased in every way. it leads me to believe that they are not nearly so biased as the liberal would like to think. of course, I fully recognize that I have my own bias to take into account, but then again, so does the liberal. edit: one does wonder if your problem was the conclusions that the reporters came to with the Sharia bits, or if your problem was that they even addressed the issue? | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:56 SayGen wrote: The most important video that has come out of this thread/election thusfar and one of the reasons I went from never voting to placing my first ever vote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8R5GvwUFU8&list=FLkFC2TdayMQnjok8oN8UEog&feature=mh_lolz While the video does make some good points, I'm not sure how it qualifies as "un-narrated." On November 06 2012 09:41 cLAN.Anax wrote: Last-minute predictions: Popular vote will go to Romney. Electoral vote will go to Obama. Gary Johnson will get ~4% of the vote, just shy of the magical 5% for the benefits of the other major parties. Bleh.If GJ gets 4% of the vote I'm not sure how Romney cobbles together more popular vote than Obama-unless Jill Stein gets 4%-5%. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:47 BlackVelvet wrote: My brother (who holds a job in the journalism industry) tells me that Gallup polls and such are restricted to landline users only, who are not on the do-not-call list. So, this has the potential to skew polling results. Maybe in favor of Obama? That's what I'm temped to believe. For a while I thought Obama was a sure win. Despite what the media may have thought (and still do -- justified or not) that it's a close race that you should follow -- cause that's what their incentive is. Post-debates made it more interesting, but I still wonder if Obama will take it easy and there will be backlash/somewhat intensive questioning on the media and its coverage and portrayal of the election season. I stopped watching these cable news networks a while ago but they are still very annoying. landlines skew older and that means rightwing. that's why they have to guesstimate the party representation. | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
On November 06 2012 09:59 sc2superfan101 wrote: I've noticed a very strong correlation between one's political persuasion and the degree to which one says Fox News is biased or not. most conservatives or right-leaning moderates will say that Fox News is either relatively unbiased, or moderately biased. most left-leaning moderates and liberals will say that Fox News is either very biased, or ridiculously biased in every way. it leads me to believe that they are not nearly so biased as the liberal would like to think. of course, I fully recognize that I have my own bias to take into account, but then again, so does the liberal. edit: one does wonder if your problem was the conclusions that the reporters came to with the Sharia bits, or if your problem was that they even addressed the issue? Have you ever been to that "foxnation" website they have? Yeah, fox is pretty bad. And the people who comment there are stupid on a level I have never witnessed before. | ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
On November 06 2012 10:16 heliusx wrote: Have you ever been to that "foxnation" website they have? Yeah, fox is pretty bad. And the people who comment there are stupid on a level I have never witnessed before. Oh my goodness, I had never heard of that before but that front page, the liberal media bias section, the comments on the featured Romney article, the results of the polling... What the hell is this place? Never mind I'm pretty sure some people are trolling the comments section. Reference. | ||
| ||
