Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The polls are wrong - McCain is winning - and here's why..

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Fromabove
 


Do you have a linky poo? If not you are stinky poo. Anyone can fabricate numbers; for instance, almost all NBA players are going to vote for Obama because they smoke Mary Jane and play basketball just like him.

Am I wrong?

[edit on 6-10-2008 by pluckynoonez]




posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   










Barack Obama has risen to his highest-ever level in both our electoral college and popular vote projections, principally on the strength of his commanding lead in the national tracking polls. Gallup, Rasmussen and Hotline each have Obama ahead by 7 points, and Research 2000 has him up by 12 (Battleground, which has generally had the most conservative numbers for Obama, does not publish on the weekend). Whether or not the McCain campaign's new round of attacks will have a significant impact on Obama's numbers we shall see, but they're going to have to knock him off a fairly high pedestal.


FiveThirtyEight.com


[edit on 6-10-2008 by ANoNyMiKE]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by stikkinikki
 

How can it get worse? That's what a lot of folks thought about Nixon and Ford. And sure as hell - Jimmy Carter!

What a disaster!



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
I'm not going to argue with the OP. I would love for you guys to keep believing that's the way it is......

Then in November, you can receive your big fat liberal surprise!

(And you can thank Sarah Palin! We Do.)

By the way, McCain is not "winning"......even Faux News has Obama up.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I see it different. I don't trust the polls. I see it as a potential kiss of death if somebody is leading in the polls by too much. Let's say Obama is winning by 15% leading up to the vote. How many people do you think will sit at home thinking Obama already has this one in the bag? Likewise how many reps you think will sit at home thinking Obama has already won this one? This could lead to a real close race at the end. I think the only thing that will decide this is who gets their voters to the poll. Just because Obama has a lead doesn't mean those people will vote.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
I see it different. I don't trust the polls. I see it as a potential kiss of death if somebody is leading in the polls by too much. Let's say Obama is winning by 15% leading up to the vote. How many people do you think will sit at home thinking Obama already has this one in the bag? Likewise how many reps you think will sit at home thinking Obama has already won this one? This could lead to a real close race at the end. I think the only thing that will decide this is who gets their voters to the poll. Just because Obama has a lead doesn't mean those people will vote.


Isn't Obama up among "likely voters" more than even in the general polls though? What about all the recent hundreds of thousands of new registered Democrats? Why would they bother to register for the first time and then not vote? I'm not saying Obama will win or that the data is accurate, hell follow the polls and it appeared that Kerry was going to be our new president during that elections, however people keep forgetting a lot of key factors, including the polling done in regards to the Electoral College.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 


I just don't buy too much in polls. In a way they disenfranchise votes. There are many people who register but don't vote. Some are pushed to register and others register via free rap events like the one they recently held in Florida. But unless they vote, registration is mean less. In addition, if the poll is too high at the end, regardless of who is leading, their supporters may be inclined to not vote under the impression that their candidate is definitely going to win. The electoral college is even more complicated. I do believe it was the 2004 polls that had trouble and had predicted things wrong. As far as this poll based on all that has gone on, I would assume it to be correct. But it is usually based on a couple of thousands out of the 120-150 million voters registered to vote. May the best one win.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
McCain's plan of give the rich tax breaks so they will create more jobs is the economy that America thrived under during Reagan.
Did you ever get a job from a poor person.
No I bet it was you that gave him a job or at least some money. That includes poor neighborhood children and nephews and nieces, grandchildren as well.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   
there are 200,000,000.0 eligable voters in america.
Less than fifty percent are registered to vote which leaves
100,000,000.0
Fifty percent of those registered to vote will vote (note very very liberal figure) which leaves 50,000,000.0
So a president will be elected by 26,000,000.0 people in USA which is
thirteen percent of eligable to vote population.
How does that smoke in your pipe?
Pitable figures and

23.9 percent of the adult U.S. population identifies itself as Catholic. This tallies with estimates by the U.S. Catholic Church itself
54,492,000.0 Americans are Catholic.
www.reuters.com...



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


numbers don't add up. If not mistaken about 120 million voted in last election which was about 60% of registered voters.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
I see it different. I don't trust the polls. I see it as a potential kiss of death if somebody is leading in the polls by too much. Let's say Obama is winning by 15% leading up to the vote. How many people do you think will sit at home thinking Obama already has this one in the bag? Likewise how many reps you think will sit at home thinking Obama has already won this one? This could lead to a real close race at the end. I think the only thing that will decide this is who gets their voters to the poll. Just because Obama has a lead doesn't mean those people will vote.


I tend to agree with this statement. The percetages I gave came from news reports from various news programs, as I tend to travel the channels to stay on top of things. If I can I will try to google them up. But now another factor comes into play, and that is the "sit at home" voter. The person who either says, "my guy will win" or "I give up". The question is, how many of either side does it. I would think the person who is up will have the most of those due to false confidence.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I was going to go vote for McCain but now that I see it won't make a difference so I will get the tires changed instead. I hope you are right or I would feel pretty guilty.


LOL, I really hope you are being sarcastic. To be honest, I HATE polls, and I absolutely DO NOT trust them. Look at Election Day, how often have they prematurely declared a victor through "Exit Polls", only to back-track with the Real results and finally declare the opposite? I have been pondering as of recent, similar to the direction which the MSM has taken lately, do these "Polls" serve to display the actual feelings/results of American Voters Opinions, or do they serve to manipulate and create such Opinions?



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 



Your figures:
120,000,000 is 60% of registered voters which gives us
200,000,000 is 100% of registered voters.

US population= 301,139,947 of which 25% are not adults which gives us
225,000,000 adults in USA.So you think that all eligable adult Americans minus 25,000,000 are registered? (there are 25,000,000 felon adults not eligable alone) (not even including illegal aliens and other non eligable parties).

You think that 88.88% of eligable adult Americans are registered to vote? 88.88%???

I doubt that 50.00% of eligable voters are registered.
I take the eligable adult population and half that=100,000,000.
Half of them vote=50,000,000.

Your figure of 120,000,000 is 60% of adult eligable voters.

Go to a bar this Friday and take a survey on your own of patrons and see how many are eligable, how many are registered, and how many are going to vote. Be ready to be surprised.

President will get elected with 26,000,000 voters.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by fmcanarney
 


Didn't Bush, and Kerry both get more then 50,000,000 votes, or over 100,000,000 votes total? So how does that compare with your idea of 26,000,000 voting for the president. If anything more will vote this year to make sure Obama, and not Bush's 3rd term, gets in office. Also, all you people saying Obama is Socialism, Bush, and McCain, demanded that we do the most socialist thing America has ever done. McCain stopped his campaign to perform socialism that Bush said was needed. Republicans in the Senate demanded socialism. So if you don't want socialism I don't see why you're voting for McCain. Go to Ron Paul he wants to get rid of the IRS and any form of socialism. I know you won't since the GOP hates Ron for being a RINO, Republican In Name Only, since Ron Paul actually cares about AMerica and fights for it.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Oh really? McCain is winning and the polls are false? Oh ok.... its just confusing hearing this from you fellas... not to long ago McCain was ahead and by then the polls verymuch counted.

The hypocrisy express. Get off it.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by stikkinikki
I was going to go vote for McCain but now that I see it won't make a difference so I will get the tires changed instead. I hope you are right or I would feel pretty guilty.

we should have a minimum knowledge test instituted to allow people to vote. if you don't know who the candidates are and basic stuff of what they stand for you shouldn't vote.
and yes those people should get their tires changed instead.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Michael Dukakis once had a 17 pt opinion poll lead over Bush, Sr. in 1988, before losing to Bush in a landslide.


Nader/Gonzalez 2008



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 02:01 AM
link   
These polls neve take into acount the bradley effect.
if obama isn't ahead by at least 15% he doesn't have a snowball's chance of winning. remember this so when the msm brags about oby being "ahead" in the polls by 5,6 or even 7 points you can just laugh in their face


it has already been proven with Hillary and Oby:

But early evening Tuesday briefings on exit polls, the product of nonpartisan technicians, cautioned the listeners not to be carried away by favorable Obama numbers around the country because his actual performance often is overstated by exit polls. (Indeed, contrary to early exit poll signals of an Obama upset in New Jersey, Clinton carried the state comfortably.) No explanation was given for this aberration, but many listeners presumed it was the Bradley Effect. www.realclearpolitics.com...




[edit on 7-10-2008 by Fathom]



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   


The polls are wrong - McCain is winning - and here's why..

This is what I am hearing from some news reports.


And then:



I also don't have confidence in the polls because of the media.


So news reports are an accurate source to draw from but the media is lacking your confidence? What's the difference? And no links? Sources might help you make your case but none are provided.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Good post.

Polls hold LITTLE credence to me and in the past have been shown to be hit and miss by large margins.

I will say that all through out the campaign, even early primaries, McCain looked like he had no chance. McCain is the comeback kid of 2008 and will prove so on election day.

In addition to the OP's mentions of likely voters. Statistically, Obama supporters are no shows come election day. These voters that don't end up voting range mainly from young voters (whom are lazy to go to the polls), lower class and African Americans.

To top it off, the "republican effect" almost always comes into play when their candidate is at a major disadvantage. Voters almost ALWAYS turn out.





new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join