|
|
On November 06 2012 13:35 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:32 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. I always wondered, how are internal polling numbers superior to analysis of aggregated polls? What insight or data do they have that external polls don't? Honest question here. They have databases that dwarf facebook/google/boa/etc---COMBINED-- wrt voter information. Remember we've been calling people since February about preferences. That gets aggregated with the millions upon millions they spend on personal information. And this data is constantly being refreshed every two years (or more). And we don't call just 1,000 people or so--we call all of them. The amount of data the parties have is seriously incredible. If they have models predicting something, I'll trust them over the media automated polls 100% of the time.
Why not put your money where your mouth is? Intrade or fairbet are giving tremendous returns on a Romney win.
|
Final post w/r/t the election: (and I'd love if xDaunt would respond to my earlier post about how Silver's model undervalued Democrats in 08 and 10)
Aggregations have Obama at 90%+, however most use a Gaussian model which doesn't take into account Black Swan events. I think the book Black Swan is making traders cautious and keeping Obama at about 75% on most betting sites.
The difference between most betting sites and intrade, I believe, is market manipulation and low-info market participants, since in a 0-arbitrage market betting sites and intrade would be at the same price, but intrade gets cited by the media more than other sites so I believe it is frequently manipulated by both sides.
On November 06 2012 13:57 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:35 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. I always wondered, how are internal polling numbers superior to analysis of aggregated polls? What insight or data do they have that external polls don't? Honest question here. They have databases that dwarf facebook/google/boa/etc---COMBINED-- wrt voter information. Remember we've been calling people since February about preferences. That gets aggregated with the millions upon millions they spend on personal information. And this data is constantly being refreshed every two years (or more). And we don't call just 1,000 people or so--we call all of them. The amount of data the parties have is seriously incredible. If they have models predicting something, I'll trust them over the media automated polls 100% of the time. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Intrade or fairbet are giving tremendous returns on a Romney win.
If you want to bet on Romney intrade is a horrible place to do so, you only get 2:1 on your money where most sites offer 3:1.
|
On November 06 2012 13:55 oneofthem wrote:
clearly more space lasers
starwars... is where it is at
|
On November 06 2012 13:45 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:38 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:37 RCMDVA wrote:On November 06 2012 13:26 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. You do realize why he's laughing, don't you? Well evidently not. No shit GOP numbers have him within striking distance, you think they'll leak information days before the election telling you they're making a desperate last ditch hail marry? Then why was Bill Clinton sent to Philadelphia today? If it was a lock? So he has a good chance of catching pneumonia and not being a pain in Obama's ass for the next 4 years? Because the election is all but a lock at this point, why not counter what the Republicans are doing to minimize risk. It ain't over until it's over. Even though all the polls give Obama the lead, the lead in every swing state is narrow enough that Romney can still steal it. To put it another way, it's hard to lose a basketball game with 10 seconds left and a three point lead. But if you and your team just stand there with your thumbs up you asses with ten seconds left ... you'll lose.
Yes. Its not mathematically impossible for Romney to win. But (a) all polls would have to have a major bias in them (b) Romney would have to win almost every state that is a tossup.
Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely that every state that is a tossup breaks for Romney? Not really.
|
On November 06 2012 13:55 oneofthem wrote:
clearly more space lasers
Tax cuts for space laser owners.
|
On November 06 2012 13:57 jalstar wrote:Final post w/r/t the election: (and I'd love if xDaunt would respond to my earlier post about how Silver's model undervalued Democrats in 08 and 10) Aggregations have Obama at 90%+, however most use a Gaussian model which doesn't take into account Black Swan events. I think the book Black Swan is making traders cautious and keeping Obama at about 75% on most betting sites. The difference between most betting sites and intrade, I believe, is market manipulation and low-info market participants, since in a 0-arbitrage market betting sites and intrade would be at the same price, but intrade gets cited by the media more than other sites so I believe it is frequently manipulated by both sides. Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:57 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 13:35 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. I always wondered, how are internal polling numbers superior to analysis of aggregated polls? What insight or data do they have that external polls don't? Honest question here. They have databases that dwarf facebook/google/boa/etc---COMBINED-- wrt voter information. Remember we've been calling people since February about preferences. That gets aggregated with the millions upon millions they spend on personal information. And this data is constantly being refreshed every two years (or more). And we don't call just 1,000 people or so--we call all of them. The amount of data the parties have is seriously incredible. If they have models predicting something, I'll trust them over the media automated polls 100% of the time. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Intrade or fairbet are giving tremendous returns on a Romney win. If you want to bet on Romney intrade is a horrible place to do so, you only get 2:1 on your money where most sites offer 3:1.
So you arbitrage the difference. Places where Romney's win has 'terrible' odds are places where you sell Romney contracts and places where Romney has good odds you buy contracts of equivalent value.
|
On November 06 2012 13:59 DanceSC wrote:starwars... is where it is at
But the question is...will it be a micky mouse head in space now?
...
Joking aside, I'm not crazy about either candidate, but I dislike Romney's foreign policy and like Obama's stance on social issues so...
I hope he wins I guess...
Either way I will mostly be happy that people will stop mobbing me on my way to class begging me to vote -.-
|
On November 06 2012 14:03 Trineal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:59 DanceSC wrote:On November 06 2012 13:55 oneofthem wrote:
clearly more space lasers starwars... is where it is at But the question is...will it be a micky mouse head in space now? ... Joking aside, I'm not crazy about either candidate, but I dislike Romney's foreign policy and like Obama's stance on social issues so... I hope he wins I guess... Either way I will mostly be happy that people will stop mobbing me on my way to class begging me to vote -.-
joking aside, I hate what he has done in the last 4 years, I hate his empty promises, I have yet to hear a viable plan for the future. On top of that I dislike his arrogant personality :/
I hope he doesn't...
Either way I look at it, don't have to be conservative or liberal to realize that America can't take another 4 years at its current rate.
|
On November 06 2012 13:57 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:35 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. I always wondered, how are internal polling numbers superior to analysis of aggregated polls? What insight or data do they have that external polls don't? Honest question here. They have databases that dwarf facebook/google/boa/etc---COMBINED-- wrt voter information. Remember we've been calling people since February about preferences. That gets aggregated with the millions upon millions they spend on personal information. And this data is constantly being refreshed every two years (or more). And we don't call just 1,000 people or so--we call all of them. The amount of data the parties have is seriously incredible. If they have models predicting something, I'll trust them over the media automated polls 100% of the time. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Intrade or fairbet are giving tremendous returns on a Romney win.
Because I don't think he's going to win? I've made a prediction somewhere else. Romney takes the popular, Obama wins the EC. Not sure the numbers, but my map looked exactly like the one from the top Politico story. I give romney a <1% edge in popular vote. Here is my map prediction:
+ Show Spoiler +
Saying it's closer than it looks and that he might win is not the same as saying "OMG HES GONNA WIN OMG OMG OMG OMG!!" He's still on the bad side of things.
|
On November 06 2012 13:57 jalstar wrote:Final post w/r/t the election: (and I'd love if xDaunt would respond to my earlier post about how Silver's model undervalued Democrats in 08 and 10) Aggregations have Obama at 90%+, however most use a Gaussian model which doesn't take into account Black Swan events. I think the book Black Swan is making traders cautious and keeping Obama at about 75% on most betting sites. The difference between most betting sites and intrade, I believe, is market manipulation and low-info market participants, since in a 0-arbitrage market betting sites and intrade would be at the same price, but intrade gets cited by the media more than other sites so I believe it is frequently manipulated by both sides. Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:57 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 13:35 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:On November 06 2012 12:36 BluePanther wrote:
allegedly the internal polls are very close in PA. That could be a game-changer. Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. I always wondered, how are internal polling numbers superior to analysis of aggregated polls? What insight or data do they have that external polls don't? Honest question here. They have databases that dwarf facebook/google/boa/etc---COMBINED-- wrt voter information. Remember we've been calling people since February about preferences. That gets aggregated with the millions upon millions they spend on personal information. And this data is constantly being refreshed every two years (or more). And we don't call just 1,000 people or so--we call all of them. The amount of data the parties have is seriously incredible. If they have models predicting something, I'll trust them over the media automated polls 100% of the time. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Intrade or fairbet are giving tremendous returns on a Romney win. If you want to bet on Romney intrade is a horrible place to do so, you only get 2:1 on your money where most sites offer 3:1.
Yeah at a lot of the offshore betting sites you can get even better, Romney at 10:3.
|
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI.
|
On November 06 2012 13:46 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:39 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:38 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:37 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:26 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:38 Unholy_Prince wrote:
[quote]
Internal polls have around a 6 point bias towards the party they come from. PA isn't going red. Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies. I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. You do realize why he's laughing, don't you? Well evidently not. No shit GOP numbers have him within striking distance, you think they'll leak information days before the election telling you they're making a desperate last ditch hail marry? .... sigh. Nevermind, I forget I'm talking to a bunch of liberals with fingers in their ears. I'm not relating partisan information, you know. Just remember this tomorrow. It's much closer than RCP has it. I'll just leave it at that. Republican internal poll numbers released to the public => not partisan information. I remember 3 days ago you were advocating how much more accurate RCP is than most other sources. I didn't say anything about polls that had been released to the public. So you are a Republican insider with information no one else but high ranking member of the GOP has? Lol, not exactly. But I hear stuff because I work with insiders. I know more than you do (and that's not meant as a slight). Not all of it is kept super close to the chest, but that doesn't mean they're going to report it to the media. What would they have to gain by saying "our prediction is that we are super close but are still going to lose." No, they tell the media they think they'll win and they spend a ton of money in hopes that they can.
Yes. That makes sense. As Mitt's momentum starts stalling in late October, despite internal polling that 'clearly' shows he is going to crush it, the GOP goes dark, Paul Ryan starts going to non-battle ground states to talk up his bid in 2016 and the knifes start coming out from insiders and this is all part of a clever rouse to trick the Democrats into complacency.
I understand that when you volunteer for a party you really get into the whole "My team is going to win" mentality, and good for you. Way to stay loyal to the brand and keep fighting the good fight but my god man. Take some perspective.
Edit -- Whoops, didnt see you post that second comment re Popular vs. EC votes. My bad.
|
On November 06 2012 13:48 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:07 jdseemoreglass wrote:On November 06 2012 13:04 Defacer wrote:On November 06 2012 12:59 Zaqwert wrote:
Obama will probably win and this thread will erupt in high fives and celebration.
Meanwhile every person under 18 in this country is inheriting $218,676 in national debt.
WOW, we did it you guys! FOUR MORE YEARS!
It's a great irony in life that all the silly children supporting him this time will be the one inheriting the disaster of a country his policies will leave behind. What's the national debt when you add 5 to 7 trillion to it, as Romney has essentially proposed? You are right, there is no real choice when it comes to this issue. There hasn't been for decades. It hasn't quite been 20 years since Clinton was first elected yet 
The Clinton surplus was due primarily to massive tax revenues, not to significant cuts in expenditures. Clinton's presidency was a speed bump on the road to big government.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/q9TwV.png)
|
On November 06 2012 13:42 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:31 cLAN.Anax wrote:On November 06 2012 13:17 Souma wrote:
Guys, the fortune from the fortune cookie I just ate says, "A surprise will come from an unexpected source."
That doesn't sound good~ Third party upset? :-D *crosses fingers* Some of you might find this "poll" of sorts interesting. Friend of mine recommended it and it seems very unbiased and thorough. I suggest you give it a shot and post your results. I'll be posting mine in a sec. http://www.isidewith.com/#52574784 i wouldn't say it's thorough, but it gets the major issues and candidate positions well, so you are distinguished amongst the choices given. i'm probably a neoliberal imperialist to jill stein but i get her at 93% based on that platform.
Lol, I'll be darned! I hadn't heard of Stein till tonight. Did a quick search of her and the first result was that she was arrested for something. Not the greatest first impression, haha!
Got my own results back. Whoa. Holy...
+ Show Spoiler +
O_O Uhh.... To be clear, I don't trust Romney on his stances. If he is elected, I think he would flip-flop on many things, so I only count this 90% to his "theoretical" or campaign stances, if you will.
Surprised that Goode didn't get higher than Johnson for me here. Thought for sure I'd be more in line with the Constitutionalist party than the Libertarian one, but oh well.
|
On November 06 2012 13:56 Quakecomm wrote:
I've lived in america my whole life, and I chose: THIS is the world's only superpower? We're all doomed.
Not the only superpower for much longer. A decade at the very most so don't worry too much about that.
|
On November 06 2012 14:07 DanceSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 14:03 Trineal wrote:On November 06 2012 13:59 DanceSC wrote:On November 06 2012 13:55 oneofthem wrote:
clearly more space lasers starwars... is where it is at But the question is...will it be a micky mouse head in space now? ... Joking aside, I'm not crazy about either candidate, but I dislike Romney's foreign policy and like Obama's stance on social issues so... I hope he wins I guess... Either way I will mostly be happy that people will stop mobbing me on my way to class begging me to vote -.- joking aside, I hate what he has done in the last 4 years, I hate his empty promises, I have yet to hear a viable plan for the future. On top of that I dislike his arrogant personality :/ I hope he doesn't... Either way I look at it, don't have to be conservative or liberal to realize that America can't take another 4 years at its current rate.
To be fair, I was an Obama nut 4 years ago. Thought he was Jesus.
Now...he barley gets an "eh"
|
This drive to Vegas to vote sucks.
|
On November 06 2012 14:10 Zaqwert wrote:
For all those worshipping at the altar of Nate Silver, why don't you throw your life savings on betting Obama to win?
Most bettings sites are showing him at about ~66% to win but the beloved 538 model shows him at like 93%. You don't get very many opportunities at an instant 27% expected ROI.
why do i keep checking this thread.
1. if i had money, i'd make guaranteed money by arbitraging.
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Swan_(Taleb_book)
|
On November 06 2012 14:11 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:46 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:39 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:38 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:37 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:32 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 13:26 Feartheguru wrote:On November 06 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote:On November 06 2012 12:55 Sub40APM wrote:On November 06 2012 12:49 BluePanther wrote:
[quote]
Internal polls are they ones where they base their spending money on and are far more elaborate and accurate than polling agencies.
I'm not talking out of my ass here. Apparently Romney's move there wasn't based on desperation; they actually think they can win it. l.o.l. You do realize where I get this information, don't you? GOP numbers have him within striking distance. I still paint it blue, but he's got a legit shot. The Philly poll problems will come into play. You do realize why he's laughing, don't you? Well evidently not. No shit GOP numbers have him within striking distance, you think they'll leak information days before the election telling you they're making a desperate last ditch hail marry? .... sigh. Nevermind, I forget I'm talking to a bunch of liberals with fingers in their ears. I'm not relating partisan information, you know. Just remember this tomorrow. It's much closer than RCP has it. I'll just leave it at that. Republican internal poll numbers released to the public => not partisan information. I remember 3 days ago you were advocating how much more accurate RCP is than most other sources. I didn't say anything about polls that had been released to the public. So you are a Republican insider with information no one else but high ranking member of the GOP has? Lol, not exactly. But I hear stuff because I work with insiders. I know more than you do (and that's not meant as a slight). Not all of it is kept super close to the chest, but that doesn't mean they're going to report it to the media. What would they have to gain by saying "our prediction is that we are super close but are still going to lose." No, they tell the media they think they'll win and they spend a ton of money in hopes that they can. Yes. That makes sense. As Mitt's momentum starts stalling in late October, despite internal polling that 'clearly' shows he is going to crush it, the GOP goes dark, Paul Ryan starts going to non-battle ground states to talk up his bid in 2016 and the knifes start coming out from insiders and this is all part of a clever rouse to trick the Democrats into complacency. I understand that when you volunteer for a party you really get into the whole "My team is going to win" mentality, and good for you. Way to stay loyal to the brand and keep fighting the good fight but my god man. Take some perspective. Edit -- Whoops, didnt see you post that second comment re Popular vs. EC votes. My bad.
I don't volunteer for the party. Hell, I'm barely a Republican. I have not touched a phone bank since we won the primary: I refuse to campaign for Romney or for the party in general.
|
On November 06 2012 14:12 cLAN.Anax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2012 13:42 oneofthem wrote:On November 06 2012 13:31 cLAN.Anax wrote:On November 06 2012 13:17 Souma wrote:
Guys, the fortune from the fortune cookie I just ate says, "A surprise will come from an unexpected source."
That doesn't sound good~ Third party upset? :-D *crosses fingers* Some of you might find this "poll" of sorts interesting. Friend of mine recommended it and it seems very unbiased and thorough. I suggest you give it a shot and post your results. I'll be posting mine in a sec. http://www.isidewith.com/#52574784 i wouldn't say it's thorough, but it gets the major issues and candidate positions well, so you are distinguished amongst the choices given. i'm probably a neoliberal imperialist to jill stein but i get her at 93% based on that platform. Lol, I'll be darned! I hadn't heard of Stein till tonight. Did a quick search of her and the first result was that she was arrested for something. Not the greatest first impression, haha! Got my own results back. Whoa. Holy... + Show Spoiler +O_O Uhh.... To be clear, I don't trust Romney on his stances. If he is elected, I think he would flip-flop on many things, so I only count this 90% to his "theoretical" or campaign stances, if you will. Surprised that Goode didn't get higher than Johnson for me here. Thought for sure I'd be more in line with the Constitutionalist party than the Libertarian one, but oh well.
lol shes been arrested quite a few times, it's the context in how she got arrested, not the arrests that speak for themselves, she is fighting for our rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://images.politico.com/global/2012/11/_msnbc.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgs.isidewith.com/results-image/216893806.jpg)
