+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 (/showthread.php?tid=142739)
Pages:
1
2
Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Speedy - 10-12-2012
President Obama down 31 since October 4. Not good, especially if he does poorly in the last two debates. And the Libya disaster will come up repeatedly in the last debate which will cost him lots of votes because short attention spans will forget Mission Accomplished: bin Laden eliminated no matter how often it may be mentioned.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/in-polls-biden-gets-a-hold/
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - $tevie - 10-12-2012
I guess I'm nuts to disagree with Nate Silver but I thought the numbers showing Obama with over 300 electoral votes looked kind of crazy. I never thought this woud be a blow out. The numbers above seem more realistic.
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Gutenberg - 10-12-2012
I agree, Obama is in trouble. But do you really want a President Romney? Republican administrations tend to prey on the middle and lower classes.
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Black - 10-12-2012
A CBS News-Knowledge Networks poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 50 percent giving the advantage to Mr. Biden, 31 percent to the Republican, Representative Paul D. Ryan, and 19 percent calling the debate a tie.
A CNN poll of debate-watchers, however, had 48 percent giving the debate to Mr. Ryan, and 44 percent to Mr. Biden.
The surveys are not directly comparable: the CBS News poll was conducted among undecided voters only, while the CNN poll was among all debate viewers.
Cue one of the SNL "low information voter" spots.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/23/undecided-voters-saturday-night-live-video_n_1907145.html
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Speedy - 10-12-2012
Gutenberg wrote:
I agree, Obama is in trouble. But do you really want a President Romney? Republican administrationstend toalways prey on the middle and lower classes.
Fixed.
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Black - 10-12-2012
Speedy wrote:
[quote=Gutenberg]
I agree, Obama is in trouble. But do you really want a President Romney? Republican administrationstend toalways prey on the middle and lower classes.
Fixed.
I don't think the Lincoln administration has been characterized as particularly predatory. Maybe it's time for another look.
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - Speedy - 10-12-2012
Lincoln was more of an independent. Go back further and you may find one.
Black wrote:
[quote=Speedy]
[quote=Gutenberg]
I agree, Obama is in trouble. But do you really want a President Romney? Republican administrationstend toalways prey on the middle and lower classes.
Fixed.
I don't think the Lincoln administration has been characterized as particularly predatory. Maybe it's time for another look.
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - $tevie - 10-12-2012
I shouldn't post without having had my coffee. I meant "well over 300 electoral votes". Like over 330 and Romney 191. That looked too fantastic to me.
EDIT: I give up. I can't do math this morning. :banghead:
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - beagledave - 10-12-2012
$tevie wrote:
I shouldn't post without having had my coffee. I meant "well over 300 electoral votes". Like over 330 and Romney 191. That looked too fantastic to me.
EDIT: I give up. I can't do math this morning. :banghead:
:fawkdance:
Re: Nate Silver: Obama 290, Romney 248 - $tevie - 10-12-2012
Why, I ought to...
:mad2: