It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HostileApostle
Becaue the media needs a close race or no one will care.
What will they talk about for the next five weeks if they declare it is over already?
A close race means more people are interested (ironically it is the people who are already firmly decided that get more interested), and they get more ratings/viewers and they get more money.
Obama could be polling to get 290 electoral votes by at 20% margins and the media would still call it a close race.
Originally posted by Phoenix
Maybe you'd answer your own slanted bias by discarding all polls that over sample democrats by a margin > than 3%
Of course by then you'd have no polls left to manipulate as your list would = ZERO
If sampling was honest I think it'd show exactly the opposite of what you're trying to imply.
Of course, but it's so easy to figure this out, I'm astounded that the average American news junkie - especially those so vehemently supporting Mitt Romney - haven't figured out that the race is pretty much all but over at this point.
Originally posted by Phoenix
Maybe you'd answer your own slanted bias by discarding all polls that over sample democrats by a margin > than 3%
Of course by then you'd have no polls left to manipulate as your list would = ZERO
If sampling was honest I think it'd show exactly the opposite of what you're trying to imply.
Originally posted by HostileApostle
reply to post by babybunnies
Of course, but it's so easy to figure this out, I'm astounded that the average American news junkie - especially those so vehemently supporting Mitt Romney - haven't figured out that the race is pretty much all but over at this point.
It's easy to figure out if you are honest with yourself.
Unfortunately a lot of people like to lie to themselves to create a false security. For example, the person who just suggested all the polls are fraudulent because Democrats are "oversampled". Completely ignoring demographics data that support the sampling numbers and the fact that these are random samples. But it makes that person feel better. At least for the next five weeks, they can live in a reality where Obama is losing and they are artificially happy.
Then when the polls hold true and Obama wins (barring nothing extreme happens the next five weeks), they will again lie to themselves either claiming the election was fixed, that the Democrats cheated, or some other excuse where they continue to live in their false reality where they are not in the minority.
Originally posted by babybunnies
Originally posted by Phoenix
Maybe you'd answer your own slanted bias by discarding all polls that over sample democrats by a margin > than 3%
Of course by then you'd have no polls left to manipulate as your list would = ZERO
If sampling was honest I think it'd show exactly the opposite of what you're trying to imply.
You're claiming polls are oversampling Democrats by a margin greater than 3%.
Great. My stats allow for an error margin of 8%, almost triple the margin you propose.
Originally posted by HostileApostle
reply to post by babybunnies
Of course, but it's so easy to figure this out, I'm astounded that the average American news junkie - especially those so vehemently supporting Mitt Romney - haven't figured out that the race is pretty much all but over at this point.
It's easy to figure out if you are honest with yourself.
Unfortunately a lot of people like to lie to themselves to create a false security. For example, the person who just suggested all the polls are fraudulent because Democrats are "oversampled". Completely ignoring demographics data that support the sampling numbers and the fact that these are random samples. But it makes that person feel better. At least for the next five weeks, they can live in a reality where Obama is losing and they are artificially happy.
Then when the polls hold true and Obama wins (barring nothing extreme happens the next five weeks), they will again lie to themselves either claiming the election was fixed, that the Democrats cheated, or some other excuse where they continue to live in their false reality where they are not in the minority.
But it does cast doubt on some of the narratives so far in the election. Earlier, we talked about why some polls are misinterpreted because of a misunderstanding of how statistics work. If polls truly are oversampling Democrats, that's extremely bad news for Democrats.
Originally posted by HostileApostle
reply to post by Phoenix
I've explained the polling in two other posts, you have chosen to ignore it.
There is no sampling error, it is a random sample. When random samples keep saying the same thing over and over, then you can be confident of it's results.
Originally posted by babybunnies
I've done a breakdown of the most recent polls, by state, to show where Obama is in relation to Romney in the Electoral College vote, which is, after all, the only vote which matters.
I've ignored any state with recent polls showing less than an 8% margin of victory, which is a huge error margin to have for statistics. Most statistical sampling allows for an error ratio of 3-4%.
As of the most recent polls, Obama is leading by at least 8% in
California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, for a total of 274 electoral college votes (270 needed)
Romney is leading by at least 8% in
Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia, for a total of 145 electoral college votes.
This is completely ignoring any state that hasn't had a recent poll, or in which the margin of votes is less than 8%. These states haven't even been included in this total.
We have to raise the margin of error to 9% for Obama to get less than 270.
My question is, why does it appear that the US media still seems to be portraying Mitt Romney as having a chance in this election?
Even given his debate performance last night, President Obama needs to massively screw up to lose this election. States don't swing 8% in just over a month.edit on 4-10-2012 by babybunnies because: Added Romney's Stats.
Originally posted by neo96
Romney needs what 100 electoral votes to win?
Don't see how he can pick up that many. I really don't.
Unless there there is a massive misinformation campaign going on, and underestimating Romney, and overestimating Obama.