Sat Oct 27, 2012, 07:23 PM
Dalai_1 (1,182 posts)
Ohio is not a Toss Up Nate Silver
Last edited Sat Oct 27, 2012, 07:55 PM - Edit history (1)
October 27, 2012
Taegan Goddard's Politcal Wire
Ohio Is Not a Toss Up
Nate Silver looks at the polling average in Ohio -- made up of roughly a dozen polling firms who have surveyed the state over the past 10 days -- and notes it shows President Obama with a 2.4 percentage point lead over Mitt Romney.
"There are no precedents in the database for a candidate losing with a two- or three-point lead in a state when the polling volume was that rich... It is misinformed to refer to Ohio as a toss-up. Mr. Obama is the favorite there, and because of Ohio's central position in the Electoral College, he is therefore the overall favorite in the election."
26 replies, 3255 views
Ohio is not a Toss Up Nate Silver (Original post)
|Warren DeMontague||Oct 2012||#17|
|Gabi Hayes||Oct 2012||#22|
|Gabi Hayes||Oct 2012||#24|
Response to doc03 (Reply #2)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:42 PM
winstars (2,436 posts)
21. That is NOT happening this year and if somehow these anecdotal numbers prove me wrong...
then surely we deserve to lose. After all the BS with women issues including (and its truly unbelievable if you think about it, RAPE!!!) and racism and tax returns and...voter suppression and...
After all of that we lose then we are fucked as a country, I mean really.
Unless they really steal the damn thing and then its to the barricades!!!
Response to Dalai_1 (Original post)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 07:33 PM
kansasobama (271 posts)
7. I am old enough to say this....
It is true. If we sit at home, I agree we lose. I have seen Dems sitting at home at least 3 times because.....
1. 1994 - Dems were just disappointed Health care was not passed (although many Repubs blocked it and Bob Dole filibustered other initiatives.
2. 1996 - Partially ...Everyone said Clinton is winning. Result - Clinton won by a lot narrower margin than expected.
3. 2010 - Obama did not improve fast enough. Result: Permanent damage to progressive cause.
We just cannot do this any year (including off-years)
Response to kansasobama (Reply #7)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 07:54 PM
Dalai_1 (1,182 posts)
11. I believe this is the larger vision
of President Obama's re-election campaign(as I see it)...people are more engaged and
aware of the losses /gains they personally will have.rmoney's flip flopping has brought
about far more than the usual campaign rhetoric about equality.This has been
delivered into everyone's home for them to make a choice about specific issues that
effect them individually..this campaign has defined the difference in the two political
parties more than any in my memory.What a refreshing experience we all have ,
so many who have had it the worst, in so many ways are registering,going to the polls
and voting for President Obama..
I am with you, we can do this any year!
Response to Dalai_1 (Original post)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 09:51 PM
Gabi Hayes (23,845 posts)
22. remember Ohio 2004?
this is why they got rid of VNS>>>>
''The first indication that something was gravely amiss on November 2nd, 2004, was the inexplicable discrepancies between exit polls and actual vote counts. Polls in thirty states weren't just off the mark -- they deviated to an extent that cannot be accounted for by their margin of error. In all but four states, the discrepancy favored President Bush.(16)
Over the past decades, exit polling has evolved into an exact science. Indeed, among pollsters and statisticians, such surveys are thought to be the most reliable. Unlike pre-election polls, in which voters are asked to predict their own behavior at some point in the future, exit polls ask voters leaving the voting booth to report an action they just executed. The results are exquisitely accurate: Exit polls in Germany, for example, have never missed the mark by more than three-tenths of one percent.(17) ''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''(18) In 2003, vote tampering revealed by exit polling in the Republic of Georgia forced Eduard Shevardnadze to step down.(19) And in November 2004, exit polling in the Ukraine -- paid for by the Bush administration -- exposed election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency.(20)
But that same month, when exit polls revealed disturbing disparities in the U.S. election, the six media organizations that had commissioned the survey treated its very existence as an embarrassment. Instead of treating the discrepancies as a story meriting investigation, the networks scrubbed the offending results from their Web sites and substituted them with ''corrected'' numbers that had been weighted, retroactively, to match the official vote count. Rather than finding fault with the election results, the mainstream media preferred to dismiss the polls as flawed.(21)
''The people who ran the exit polling, and all those of us who were their clients, recognized that it was deeply flawed,'' says Tom Brokaw, who served as anchor for NBC News during the 2004 election. ''They were really screwed up -- the old models just don't work anymore. I would not go on the air with them again.''
In fact, the exit poll created for the 2004 election was designed to be the most reliable voter survey in history. The six news organizations -- running the ideological gamut from CBS to Fox News -- retained Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International,(22) whose principal, Warren Mitofsky, pioneered the exit poll for CBS in 1967(23) and is widely credited with assuring the credibility of Mexico's elections in 1994.(24) For its nationwide poll, Edison/Mitofsky selected a random subsample of 12,219 voters(25) -- approximately six times larger than those normally used in national polls(26) -- driving the margin of error down to approximately plus or minus one percent.(27)''
''The lone news anchor who seriously questioned the integrity of the 2004 election was Keith Olbermann of MSNBC. I asked him why he stood against the tide. ''I was a sports reporter, so I was used to dealing with numbers,'' he said. ''And the numbers made no sense. Kerry had an insurmountable lead in the exit polls on Election Night -- and then everything flipped.'' Olbermann believes that his journalistic colleagues fell down on the job. ''I was stunned by the lack of interest by investigative reporters,'' he said. ''The Republicans shut down Warren County, allegedly for national security purposes -- and no one covered it. Shouldn't someone have sent a camera and a few reporters out there?''
Olbermann attributes the lack of coverage to self-censorship by journalists. ''You can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in trouble,'' he said. ''You cannot say: By the way, there's something wrong with our electoral system.''
Federal officials charged with safeguarding the vote have also failed to contest the election. ''Congress hasn't investigated this at all,'' says Kucinich. ''There has been no oversight over our nation's most basic right: the right to vote. How can we call ourselves a beacon of democracy abroad when the right to vote hasn't been secured in free and fair elections at home?''
Sen. John Kerry -- in a wide-ranging discussion of ROLLING STONE's investigation -- expressed concern about Republican tactics in 2004, but stopped short of saying the election was stolen. ''Can I draw a conclusion that they played tough games and clearly had an intent to reduce the level of our vote? Yes, absolutely. Can I tell you to a certainty that it made the difference in the election? I can't. There's no way for me to do that. If I could have done that, then obviously I would have found some legal recourse.''
Response to Dalai_1 (Reply #23)
Sat Oct 27, 2012, 10:07 PM
Gabi Hayes (23,845 posts)
24. yr wlcm.... hate to ever credit Dick Morris for honesty/accuracy, but this bit pretty much says it
all, from above link:
''Exit polls are almost never wrong,'' Dick Morris, a political consultant who has worked for both Republicans and Democrats, noted after the 2004 vote. Such surveys are ''so reliable,'' he added, ''that they are used as guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World countries.''
(18) In 2003, vote tampering revealed by exit polling in the Republic of Georgia forced Eduard Shevardnadze to step down.(19) And in November 2004, exit polling in the Ukraine -- paid for by the Bush administration -- exposed election fraud that denied Viktor Yushchenko the presidency.(20) ''
we do NOT live in a democracy
shouldn't 2000 and 2004 be enough?
2000 was the absolute end for economic/political democracy here. hate to sound so pessimistic, but......
hope I'm wrong