Obama keeps gaining more and more electoral votes

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Tazkven
 


You got that right!

Nothing Romney says makes sense.

I predict Obama wins this election by a large margin. As much as people want to hate Obama, it looks like he has turned things around, and has succeeded against all odds. And too many people won't be able to bring themselves to vote for Romney.




posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Polls say this race is still close.

Polititco

RealClearPolitics

HuffingtonPost

RasmussenReports

WallStreetJournal

WallStreetJournal Map

Washington Times

But honestly, as someone already said, the only poll that matters is the one that takes place when we all vote on election day. I think it's a bit premature for anyone to be celebrating considering how close this election seems.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
What about all the other studies done by them???


The original prediction model from Bickers and Berry was one of 13 published in August in "PS: Political Science and Politics," which is an American Political Science Association peer-reviewed journal. The publication has published a collection of presidential election models every four years since 1996. Berry said that this year the models showed the widest split in outcomes.

Of the models, five predicted an Obama win. Five forecast a win for Romney. And the remaining three declared the race a toss-up.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Nate has been an open supporter of the President and his newspaper just endorsed Obama (although it also went for Dukakis, so it ain’t that good at picking winners).

1. Nate isn’t very good at calling close elections. In 2010, he correctly predicted the outcome of the senate elections with the greatest leads. But in the 5 genuinely close races, he got it wrong in 3. For the House elections, Nate ran this extraordinary headline: “House Forecast: G.O.P. Plus 54-55 Seats; Significantly Larger or Smaller Gains Possible.” So, this oracle predicted that the results could have been “larger” or “smaller” – how prescient. In fact, they were much larger. The Republicans took 63 seats.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk...

Nate Silver is partisan and wrong. The voters will decide Romney v Obama, not The New York Times



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
I guess we should prefer the devil we know to the mentally ill money junkie but, then again, it ain't over until all the fixes are in. Mother told me that there would be days like this and she also said I'd catch a cold if I got cold. We should put our faith in whatever happens, then proclaim how obvious it was that this would be the outcome. Whatever we are, it is several cuts below silly and there is absolutely nothing to fear. We would do what makes sense but all other possibilities have not been exhausted yet. Just as long as Obama or Romney get elected, the whole thing will have been worthwhile. Yep, we're really on top of this election that resonates in the bowels of many Americans.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by Razimus
 


Link to your graphic?

Also the source of the graphs I posted are from Nate Silver who is a statistician who correctly predicted the 08 race and all of the senate races that year.

Look him up


I looked him up.

He is a statistician - - as you say. He works with numbers.

What his politics are is not relevant.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7


Also keep in mind that Nate Silver and Sam Wang are not pundits, and their reputation is on the line.


Reputations mean nothing.

Ask Obama and Romney.




posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by lynn112
 


Yes, it is a close race. Always has been and will be even on election day.

That doesn't change the fact that Obama currently has the edge.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kituwa
Nate has been an open supporter of the President and his newspaper just endorsed Obama (although it also went for Dukakis, so it ain’t that good at picking winners).

1. Nate isn’t very good at calling close elections. In 2010, he correctly predicted the outcome of the senate elections with the greatest leads. But in the 5 genuinely close races, he got it wrong in 3. For the House elections, Nate ran this extraordinary headline: “House Forecast: G.O.P. Plus 54-55 Seats; Significantly Larger or Smaller Gains Possible.” So, this oracle predicted that the results could have been “larger” or “smaller” – how prescient. In fact, they were much larger. The Republicans took 63 seats.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk...

Nate Silver is partisan and wrong. The voters will decide Romney v Obama, not The New York Times


Show me someone with a better track record. I know math is hard for some, but Nate's predictions are based solely on numbers - if you want to argue something, argue why his analysis is incorrect. Here's his methodology - please tell me why it's wrong.

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com...

Imo, 538 is the closest thing we have to the actual result until election day, until someone can show me otherwise.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Taiyed
 


Some polls give Obama the edge, some give it to Romney. In reality, this race is sitting at a dead heat with no one having an edge & one poll won't sway me on that opinion.

Instead of bickering over all the polls why don't we all wait until the big day to see how the only one that matters goes, our votes.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   


There are 3 types of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics


www.york.ac.uk...



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady



There are 3 types of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics


www.york.ac.uk...

Actually statistics themselves are usually pretty good. But there are several ways to manipulate statistics.
For example, people like to say that gas prices have doubled since Obama took office. The truth is gas prices went above 4 dollars under Bush for some time. and the average gas prices under each administration is about the same. They only dropped down so low for like a month or two because of the recession and our economy was so bad when Obama took office. If anything the rise in gas prices shows the economy has improved under Obama.....

My point is that you shouldn't dismiss statistics, you just need to look at how they derived the stats, as well as any other possible factors that could've influenced the stats.

edit on 31-10-2012 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Then there's this quirkyness......

www.tigerdroppings.com...

Since 1845, every election that has been held on November 6th has a Republican win.

Lincoln, Harrison, McKinley, Hoover, Eisenhower and Reagan.....Romney?



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Good on you sir.

Glad you haven't fallen victim to the ATS Right wing echo chamber


I am not right wing and despise most Republicans as much as I despise most Democrats.

I asked on page 1, and many times since, who exactly is this good news for? No one can seem to answer. Keep patting yourself on the back though, I won't hold my breath for your answer, since the answer is no one. High five though! Your team is winning!



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by LeoStarchild
 


Why do i care? cause i don't want an Iran's Nuke misdirected at my country because one of the candidate is a warmonger.


So you agree Iran is going for nukes. You agree Iran would nuke Canada over something another country did. Yet you think they should be left alone and allowed to have such weapons? Wow ... not much else to say.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Tazkven
 


Man these are my exact thoughts. I know Obama hasn't been perfect at all, but to give your vote to someone as phoney as Romney is just being a hypocrite.
edit on 31-10-2012 by Flow101 because: (no reason given)
edit on 31-10-2012 by Flow101 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


I don't waste my time with stupid questions


There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers. You know the drill



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by cconn487

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


I don't waste my time with stupid questions


There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers. You know the drill


The translation to his reply is "I have no answer so I must deflect." How sad is it when you cheer for someone to win, yet can't come up with a single group of people he has helped.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Nate Silver of the NY Times. Obama lapdog/propagandist. Yeah, I believe this garbage. Especially since it is completely counter to EVERY other poll out there, including Gallup. This isn't even a poll - it's this d*****bag's opinion. Please stop peddling this crap as fact, because it is not.




edit on 31-10-2012 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)
edit on 31-10-2012 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
GOOD ! I dont like Obama but atleast the defecit will creep to even higher debt and will be met with more resistance by congress than Romney who will automatically raise the defecit 7 trillion plus off the bat,and will be met with less resistance than Obama trying to both pass unconstitutional crappy policies, how high can our defecit go ? will be 17 trillion in a few weeks,,when will these idiots and Mittiots learn that until we END foreign aid and END these overseas rebuilding excursions, we will NEVER see a decrease in the defecit.





new topics
top topics
 
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join