Who Will WinóROMNEY or OBAMA?
- This topic has 50 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 3 months ago by pixelate.
November 4, 2012 12:44 pm at 12:44 pm #605676
It is less than two days before Election Day. The question here is who do YOU think will WIN. (The question here is NOT who do you want to win or who you will vote for.)
Please state who you think will win and WHY you think he will win:November 4, 2012 2:43 pm at 2:43 pm #991882
The polling is generally accurate. While the national polls are showing a virtual tie, the battleground states polls are mostly all showing Obama ahead. And the battleground states are what is going to determine the election.November 4, 2012 5:53 pm at 5:53 pm #991883
Romney. As shlishi stated, the state polls are going to determine the election. As Romney is leading the electoral vote in all unskewed polls, he will clearly have both the popular AND the electoral vote.November 4, 2012 7:15 pm at 7:15 pm #991884ToiParticipant
I haver found that liberal leaning sites are only putting obama up by a bit, which means that in reality hes not up at all. i really hope he loses.November 4, 2012 8:36 pm at 8:36 pm #991885dhl144Member
Please HASHEM Romney!!November 4, 2012 9:12 pm at 9:12 pm #991886
uneeq: Which polls are skewed and which are unskewed? From what I can tell, almost all the new battleground state polls coming out over this final weekend is looking bad for Romney.November 5, 2012 2:20 am at 2:20 am #991887Chiller613inthehouseMember
Romney!!!!!!November 5, 2012 3:06 am at 3:06 am #991888YW Moderator-42Moderator
Ross Perot.November 5, 2012 9:52 am at 9:52 am #991889WhiteberryMember
Traditionally Democratic papers, including the NY Daily News, papers in LA, Orlando and Ft. Lauderdale (among others) have come out endorsing Romney in the last 24 hours. How many of these polls were taken after readers of such traditionally democratic papers woke up on sunday to editorials spelling out clearly why Romney is the better choice.November 5, 2012 2:42 pm at 2:42 pm #991890farrocksMember
Newspaper editorial endorsements have very little effect on voter choices.November 5, 2012 5:04 pm at 5:04 pm #991891hudiParticipant
I’m predicting OBAMA, but don’t change your vote BC of this.November 5, 2012 5:47 pm at 5:47 pm #991892
shlishi: Any poll that assumes that the democratic turnout will be equal to 2008 is skewed. In 2008 the democrats had an especially high turnout due to much higher enthusiasm. This year the pollsters are saying that republicans have much higher enthusiasm; the 2010 midterm elections have proven that.
Additionally, 8% more independents voted for obama than for mccain. This year the polls show Romney leading by 11% in independents, a massive change that isn’t applied in most of the polls. Most state polls with Obama leading are showing a lead of a small percentage which DOES NOT include the independents, or it includes too little independents, or they have the independents leaning towards Obama like in 2008. Include the independents the right way, and Romney clearly wins all the close polls.
History also states that if an incumbent isn’t polling at least 50%, then he will most likely not win the state. (For example, if Obama leads 47-45, that means that there’s another 8% which is mostly undecideds.) That is because all the undecideds are usually undecided about voting for Romney or for some other third party candidate. They are familiar with Obama and his policies, and they wouldn’t still be undecided if they end up voting for him. So Romney wins a great percentage of the undecideds, and the race isn’t going in Obama’s direction as Nate Silver wants us to think.November 5, 2012 7:13 pm at 7:13 pm #991893MorahRachMember
Romney is up 270,000 votes from early voting in Ohio.November 5, 2012 8:37 pm at 8:37 pm #991894
Not too many people vote based on who they think will win.November 5, 2012 8:38 pm at 8:38 pm #991895
Voldermort.November 5, 2012 8:49 pm at 8:49 pm #991896TheGoqParticipant
Mitt WILL win, lets get ready for 2016 mitt v hillary.November 5, 2012 8:54 pm at 8:54 pm #991897ūüćęSyag LchochmaParticipant
OOM – he won the last electionNovember 5, 2012 9:04 pm at 9:04 pm #991898
It’s funny that my post is still highlighted orange from 3 hours ago and still didn’t go up, while others have been posted after it. It must be “ignore long posts day” again.November 5, 2012 9:25 pm at 9:25 pm #991899BrooklinebornParticipant
Does anyone use medicaid, food stamps, medicare, Section 8, Child Health Plus or Family Health programs. HEAP.. Romney Ryan will kiss those goodbye. Do you receive or need student loans to study or go to seminary, low cost housing loans… All gone with Romney Ryan. I cannot afford to support others in may family so they can learn. Maybe you can do so? think carefully before you pull that lever.November 5, 2012 10:50 pm at 10:50 pm #991900dveykus613Participant
SERIOUSLY – EVERYBODY DAVEN AND STORM THE HEAVENS IN THE NEXT 24 HOURS – OUR FUTURE IS AT STAKE!!
?? ??? ???????? ????? ???!!! ??? ??’? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ?’ ?????? – ????? ?????? ???? ????? – ???’ ??? ?????? ?”? ??? ??? ?? ?????? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ????? ???? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ??’? ?? ?? ??????. ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ????, ????? ???? ?? ?????? ?’ ?? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??????. ?? ??? ???? ????? ???? ???? ?????? ?? ??????!!!! ????? ?24 ???? ????!!!!?November 5, 2012 10:53 pm at 10:53 pm #991901zahavasdadParticipant
Nobody knows the early voting in Ohio. Its all speculation there. You are not required to register for a party there
Other states Like NV, FL, NC they know by party registrationNovember 6, 2012 12:17 am at 12:17 am #991902MorahRachMember
Oh my goodness I am so sick of people saying that Romney means the end of government help. Pay attention!!!!!!!!!! Romney does not want the world to be as dependent on gov assistance as we have become due to Obama’s failing policies, and ” the gov owes me” attitude. Gov Romney does not plan to take benefits from those who truly need it. There is a huge misconception about Republicans and the end of learning in kollel as we know it. It’s a farce.November 6, 2012 12:25 am at 12:25 am #991903Chiller613inthehouseMember
Brooklineborn- although Obama supports all these programs- he’s also TRIPLED the debt, and his healthcare is killer. we taxpayers are paying for EVERYTHING. Also, Obama is clearly Anti- Israel & disagrees with all jewish Morals. He has noo clue how to deal with foreign affairs,especially all the Mid East & Iran.
On the other hand, Romney is a sucsessful buisnessman who has experience. He knows how to turn this economy around. He is also very religious and respcts Eretz Yisrael and the Jews.
ROMNEY RYAN 2012!!!!!!!!!!!November 6, 2012 12:38 am at 12:38 am #991904
snortNovember 6, 2012 1:11 am at 1:11 am #991905
uneeq: Forget Nate Silver. I agree he is a whackjob in Obama’s pocket. He isn’t even a pollster. He just compiles other’s polls.
My question to you still is which polls ARE skewed and which AREN’T?
Polls have a strong track record, going back half a century, of being remarkedly accurate.
And the overwhelming majority of the final polls today are showing Obama ahead. Especially the battleground state polls.November 6, 2012 1:19 am at 1:19 am #991906chassidishY.U.typeMember
I think Romney will win, Israel will bomb Iran, and Mashiach will come. What do you think?November 6, 2012 4:29 am at 4:29 am #991907WIYMember
Why does Israel bombing Iran mean Moshiach will come immediately after? Hopefully he will come well before then, but if not I see zero connection.November 6, 2012 7:41 am at 7:41 am #991908dveykus613Participant
unfortunately, Chassidish, although I would like Romney to win, I think everything you said but the first part is right – Obama will win, Israel will bomb Iran, the whole world will turn against us, it will be a scary time for klal yisroel, and be”H then Mashiach will come – not sure at what price c”v
Rav Elyashiv zt”l said the biggest sakana today is the situation in Iran and people do not take it seriously enough
If we can be chozer b’teshuva and storm the heavens with tefilla maybe we can fix the gezeira and (as the chofetz chaim said in the dream) daven that the geula should come from chesed (ie in a good way for klal yisroel) and not l’fi all the scary nevuos etc if we’re c”v not zocheh.
Everyone on their own level should try to make a bakasha/tefilla to save us and bring us close and do something SMALL to show Hash-m that we just want to be closer to him and do the right thing even though we were put in a generation where we are in the mem-tes (nun?) shaarei tumah. But to show Hash-m that we don’t want to be. We all know what our weak points are – and jumping too high won’t work, we’ll just crash. By doing something small we can show Him we want Him to bring us close and be”H in that zechus hopefully we’ll be zocheh to have any horrible gezeiros against us ripped up and will be”H have b’derech hachesed the geula sheleimah b’meheirah!November 6, 2012 8:05 am at 8:05 am #991909PosterMember
I am afraid Ombama will win. But I hope am wrong and Romney will pull through!!!!!!!!!!!November 6, 2012 3:06 pm at 3:06 pm #991910Yellow_EsrogParticipant
We need a lot of Zchusim for Romney to win.
We also need to do our Histadlus.
If Israel could vote, Obama would lose by a landslide.
Please American brothers, your family in Israel need you…
Go out and vote and do what you can to ensure that we do not have an Anti Israel president ruling the US.November 6, 2012 6:03 pm at 6:03 pm #991911
Shlishi: Google “unskewed polls” and click on the first result. While I don’t agree with everything on the site (like their predictions,) you will be able to see the polls in a new light.November 6, 2012 7:57 pm at 7:57 pm #991912ScooterJew613Participant
Does anyone use medicaid, food stamps, medicare, Section 8, Child Health Plus or Family Health programs. HEAP.. Romney Ryan will kiss those goodbye.
Did George Bush kiss those programs away….NO
Did Ronald Reagan kiss those programs away….No
Will Mitt Romney kiss those away………NO
He still has a democratic senate to pass through and amongst other issues he has to overcome.
Will make it harder a family to qualify for food stamps possibly I guarantee you this since you work and strive harder you will be fine. Ha Kadsh Baruch Hu will intervene on your behalf to make sure you are fine.November 7, 2012 6:25 am at 6:25 am #991913ūüćęSyag LchochmaParticipant
AAAARRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!November 7, 2012 7:09 am at 7:09 am #991914
Looks like I was right, eh? ^_^November 7, 2012 9:23 am at 9:23 am #991915YW Moderator-42Moderator
Has Ross Perot been officially eliminated yet?November 7, 2012 11:29 am at 11:29 am #991916
I think Obama will win.November 7, 2012 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm #991917
Are you sure? Because the still haven’t completed the count of the the vote returns in Alaska.November 7, 2012 12:31 pm at 12:31 pm #991918that1Member
well who ever said romney was wrong i guess we will do this again in 4 yearsNovember 7, 2012 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm #991919
uneeq: Looks like the polls were dead on right and weren’t as skewered as thought.November 7, 2012 9:49 pm at 9:49 pm #991920
Shlishi: They were skewered. The fact that they ended up having the right numbers doesn’t change the wrong fundamentals behind the polling. Democratic turnout was WAY down. 10 million less Democrats showed up last night. All in all, the turnout up last night wasn’t D+11, D+7 or any of the nonsense that they’ve been claiming all along. The difference between GOP to Dems was a million or so votes, spread out between a bunch of swing states.
Though, I will admit to being wrong about the Republicans. Enthusiasm was shown to be much higher than in 2008, so I assumed that would translate to more votes. I also assumed that the 2010 elections proved that the GOP had a bigger voter base than before. I was flat out wrong. As of now, Romney has received 2 million votes LESS than McCain!
PS. I did the math: 2008 Obama would have crushed 2012 Obama 53.6-46.4. Not what I expected from Romney, but I did expect better than the dismal results.November 7, 2012 11:25 pm at 11:25 pm #991921
Nate Silver is getting a lot of press lauding today for getting all 50 states called correctly. In 2008 he got 49 out of 50 correct.November 8, 2012 9:35 pm at 9:35 pm #991923
Shlishi: Calling a coin toss correctly doesn’t make the random choosing of heads or tails any more scientific. We both agreed pre-election that he’s a partisan hack. Nate’s “scientific” collection of polls that liberals love to tout, were barely scientific at all. Where was the Gallup poll in the averages? He seemed to make room for every high school that decided to hold a poll, though Gallup was not added to the average. Also, not one pre-election poll assumed that Republican turnout would be lower than 2008. How does averaging out results of polls that wrongly determine the turnout of voters deemed “scientific”? With skewed data comes unscientific results, however correct the results may turn out.
It’s funny that Republicans are portrayed by liberals as hating math, numbers, and science. We all know that it’s a farce. When a liberal person using unverified scientific methods spews the results to attack the GOP (or vice-versa), there is little reason to believe those numbers or scientific methods have any substance.
I will admit that his numbers can be scientific with some tweaking. He needs to learn about the fundamentals behind polling and not just the technicalities. It shouldn’t matter if in the past 30 elections the incumbent won if the election was on the 6th of the month. Or whether the Redskins win or lose their previous home game (this year was an anomaly compared to the previous 19 elections).November 9, 2012 2:35 am at 2:35 am #991924
How do you suppose he got all 50 States called correctly? (And 49 out of 50 in 2008.) That’s pretty impressive.
The odds of flipping a coin 50 times after correctly (and randomly) predicting whether it will be heads or tails every one of the 50 times is, mathematically, exceedingly slim.November 9, 2012 8:48 am at 8:48 am #991925
40 states were either solid Romney or Obama. There was nothing to “predict”. The last ten had many that Romney didn’t expect to win unless he got lucky. Like Wisconsin, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, etc. Nate went with the odds on those, just like most others. Most GOP’ers were hoping for (but not expecting) surprises. The couple of states that were tied in the polling, like Ohio and Florida, Nate went with Obama as a partisan hack and came up lucky. Nate only flipped two coins, both of which the results went his way due to bad turnout for the GOP.
If he had the correct data to back his predictions up, I would think higher of his work. He thought that Obama turnout would be at 2008 levels with a D+7 turnout. He ended up being right, with the results ending up between D+3 and D+6 but he was outright wrong for expecting 2008 turnout like all others in the MSM. He never would have predicted D+7 if he thought that Obama would get 10 million less votes.
What do you think, good explanation?November 9, 2012 5:34 pm at 5:34 pm #991926
It’s plausible, but I’m not convinced. I have to give him more credit than I did before the election. Beforehand, he only had one election behind him (2008) and while he predicted very good, everyone gets lucky sometimes. But two back-to-back with such accuracy has me reevaluating his skills. Truth be told, he is a statistician by background.November 10, 2012 6:40 pm at 6:40 pm #991927
I understand that he’s a statistician by profession. I still believe that there is a great amount of science to be applied to many of the statistics. Take for example, baseball. Every team had a great deal of statistics, and the players with the most RBI, HR’s and hits were most likely to sought by all the richest teams. Billy Beane came around and decided that while the use of those statistics were a decent indicator of a players talents, they were highly flawed in regards to the overall contribution of a team. He built a team built around OBP and was highly competitive with extremely low salaries paid out. (I never watched Moneyball but I heard that as the basic idea).
So while I agree that his statistics may be the best ones out there today, I’m not extremely sold on his use of averaging unscientific polls. He has to un-skew the polls, which would based on the average turnout predicted in polls, and average a demographic of the Likely Voters. I believe his accuracy can’t stay perfect if he keeps his same methods for next election. Again, the Redskins called almost every election correctly without any use of science. Hopefully he uses a little more science and not just numbers next time.November 11, 2012 3:51 am at 3:51 am #991928
The guy that runs the “unskwered polls” site you referenced earlier above, has come out and publicly admitted he was wrong.November 11, 2012 6:41 am at 6:41 am #991929
I agreed above that not everything on his site was supposed to be agreed with. Though I do agree that with his idea of showing the data behind the polls. A lot of the major polls hid their turnout numbers on the 30th page of their reports. It was also shown that some of the major polls as the election got closer, some polls went from the extremes of D+11 to just D+3 in only two consecutive polls. If that doesn’t raise eye brows, nothing does.
All the major turnout polls trended higher turnout for GOP. Independents trended higher for GOP, too, (including in the results, the GOP got more IND’s). Gallup and Rasmussen had massive 5,000 person samples to base their data on. Those polls were definitely more “scientific” than the subjective guesses of those at CNN, reuters, and others. The fact that the more scientific ones came out wrong only shows that there’s something wrong with the science as of now.November 11, 2012 1:21 pm at 1:21 pm #991930mosheemes2Member
The anti-Silver theory you have doesn’t match up with the facts.
Silver never said anything about his expectations for turnout levels and they were irrelevant for his model. The model did predict what he thought the percentages of the total vote would be for both candidates and he was basically correct about that.
Leaving that out of it, if nothing else comes out of the work Silver does, the basic argument that should come out is that if one candidate leads in virtually all reliable polls (and Silver has a clear, non–partisan methodology for determining what he views as reliable), as Obama was in Ohio, that candidate is most likely leading even if all of those polls are within the margin of error. Statistically this statement should not be controversial, but for some reason it is.
It’s also worth noting this is the third election he’s worked on (he also made predictions in 2010 on the Senate and governor races) and so far he’s only been wrong 7 times on the state level (2008: Indiana Presidential, 2010 Alaska, Colorado and Nevada Senate and Illinois Governor, and 2012 North Dakota and Montana Senate). Every one of those times he’s picked a Republican who lost.November 11, 2012 5:34 pm at 5:34 pm #991931
I posted over 10 hours ago and it’s still didn’t go through yet…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.