Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[molson]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

just want molson to know - as a thoughtful voter, i did actually vote for a republican, and i didn't just look down the ballot and see "red/blue"

honestly, I would have possibly voted for more, but all of the incumbents running unopposed were democrats (there were only a couple contested races), so that kind of tied my hand.

I didn't mean to say I thought you were a sheep and/or whatever else. I don't remember exactly what set me off but apologize for any offense.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Just for the record, I don't believe in the Bradley effect. I just believe that a lot of the polling methodology in this election has been flawed. We'll see soon enough.

And post a damn prediction like the rest of us if you want to continue to bitch about this.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I've consistently stated that I believe the race will end in a 2-3 point margin and that the 6-7 point margin predicted by most of the polls is statistically incorrect due to poll weighting. You've been in this thread most of the time. I'd think you'd remember that has been my belief all along.

And if you're of a different belief, well, you'll get your answer one way or another in less than 24 hours.

oh that enigmatic Bradley effect. Well then it's simply a prediction at this point....I wish you wouldve gone the "IMO" Prediction route throughout this thread instead of using polls when it helped the cause or sparked some sort of "rally" effect.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

I don't enjoy picking on you so much, but damn dude, try and post something in this thread that's not completely and totally false once in a while...

Forty-six percent of likely voters now say having Palin on the ticket makes them less likely to support McCain -- up 14 points in just the past month and more than double what it was in early September. And among those who call the candidates' age an important factor in their vote, more, 61 percent, say Palin makes them less likely to back McCain.

Yes, an ABC poll is obviously 'proof'. This campaign would have been dead in the water at that point with a selection of Romney or Huckabee. You're insane to think otherwise. I like McCain, but there's no way I'd vote for the ticket with either of those guys on it. I would have cast my vote for Obama.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

I don't enjoy picking on you so much, but damn dude, try and post something in this thread that's not completely and totally false once in a while...

Forty-six percent of likely voters now say having Palin on the ticket makes them less likely to support McCain -- up 14 points in just the past month and more than double what it was in early September. And among those who call the candidates' age an important factor in their vote, more, 61 percent, say Palin makes them less likely to back McCain.

Are there similar polls for strictly undecided voters, or McCain + undecided voters? I don't think an Obama voter answer to that question tells us much.

McCain probably would have been better off with a slightly more polished unknown, but she was worth the risk. He wasn't in a position to play it safe. She would have been a success for him only if she answered some questions from Katie Couric better (not saying that COST him the election, but I think she would have been a net gain for him without those flubs).

Hucabee or Romney would have been a disaster, and I think it's revisionist history to argue anything different. The Republican brand is damaged, and he NEEDED someone new and relatively unknown, ideally someone who went against party lines. Palin really was quite perfect on paper, if only she had maybe one more term as governor. He really neutered the one big advantage he had in this election, experience. I feel dirty when I try to argue how ridiculous it is that someone with Obama's weak credentials is this close to the presidency (I put him at approximately the 150th most qualified Democrat in the US). You just can't say that with a straight face when McCain goes with Palin as VP.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

And post a damn prediction like the rest of us if you want to continue to bitch about this.

LOL.....there's some awfully angry liberals in this thread. Take a medicinal weed hit and calm down.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

oh that enigmatic Bradley effect. Well then it's simply a prediction at this point....I wish you wouldve gone the "IMO" Prediction route throughout this thread instead of using polls when it helped the cause or sparked some sort of "rally" effect.

I didn't say anything about the 'Bradley Effect'.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

LOL.....there's some awfully angry liberals in this thread. Take a medicinal weed hit and calm down.

The stress of being able to control government and not just complain about it is clearly setting in.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Yes, an ABC poll is obviously 'proof'. This campaign would have been dead in the water at that point with a selection of Romney or Huckabee. You're insane to think otherwise. I like McCain, but there's no way I'd vote for the ticket with either of those guys on it. I would have cast my vote for Obama.

Interestingly enough, most of my friends and coworkers are like me, independent from a party, and the majority of them would have voted for McCain instead of Obama if Romney was on the ticket (but definitely not Huckabee).

Just one example out of a mid-20s group of NYCers, of course.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Logan

Interestingly enough, most of my friends and coworkers are like me, independent from a party, and the majority of them would have voted for McCain instead of Obama if Romney was on the ticket (but definitely not Huckabee).

Just one example out of a mid-20s group of NYCers, of course.

That wouldn't surprise me. McCain would have performed better in New England with Romney, but likely still would have lost most of those states. It wouldn't have helped much from an electoral college standpoint.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by molson

Are there similar polls for strictly undecided voters, or McCain + undecided voters? I don't think an Obama voter answer to that question tells us much.

If it's 46% of likely voters you can roughly sort out the breakdown. Or even better, go look at the poll itself!! I linked to it. They do crosstabs.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I didn't say anything about the 'Bradley Effect'.

Then you better call the cavalry. Where are you pulling your numbers from? A guess?

I think, my prediction, is that you'll truly have to rethink your ability to analyze and predict when this thing is over.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Last night, I started seeing Rev Wright ads again here in Virginia. Way to make the closing argument there with some subtle racism.

SI

Why does negative advertising against Obama have to be classified as racism, SI? There's plenty of Bill Ayers stuff out there as well. Is the good reverend off-limits simply because he's black?

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by molson

The stress of being able to control government and not just complain about it is clearly setting in.

Yeah, because Obama's my guy. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

If he hadn't chosen Palin, he'd be losing by 15+ rather than the 2-3 points he'll likely lose by today. Palin is the sole reason this election is still close.

plus one

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

Are there similar polls for strictly undecided voters, or McCain + undecided voters? I don't think an Obama voter answer to that question tells us much.

McCain probably would have been better off with a slightly more polished unknown, but she was worth the risk. He wasn't in a position to play it safe. She would have been a success for him only if she answered some questions from Katie Couric better (not saying that COST him the election, but I think she would have been a net gain for him without those flubs).

Hucabee or Romney would have been a disaster, and I think it's revisionist history to argue anything different. The Republican brand is damaged, and he NEEDED someone new and relatively unknown, ideally someone who went against party lines. Palin really was quite perfect on paper, if only she had maybe one more term as governor. He really neutered the one big advantage he had in this election, experience. I feel dirty when I try to argue how ridiculous it is that someone with Obama's weak credentials is this close to the presidency (I put him at approximately the 150th most qualified Democrat in the US). You just can't say that with a straight face when McCain goes with Palin as VP.

I think Huckabee could have been a very good pick. There's not a dime's worth of difference between he and Palin on social issues, but he's far more appealing on the stump. He and McCain also have great chemistry and could have worked together much better than McCain/Palin. IMO Huckabee is the best politician in the Republican party.

If McCain loses, the fight between Huckabee and Palin for the religious right will be brutal.

[Klinglerware]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

On a side note, I was pondering earlier whether a loss by Huckaby or Romney might have been better for the R's overall than the impending loss by McCain.

If you run with the general assumption that "they couldn't win with only the base so they had to go with McCain" to have a chance, then it seems possible they might have been better off losing 65-35 while getting their core motivated in order to help the down ballot races than losing 55-45 (just picking a number, not a prediction) with an unmotivated & demoralized base.

It's an interesting question, assuming the Republicans lose across the board today. If that happens, there will likely be some debate as to where the Republican Party should go next, in terms of strategy and philosophy. If the Republicans lose, they will have to answer some hard questions about whether their current strategic philosophy for winning elections is still tenable (I don't know the answer to this short term--it could just be bad luck and circumstances this time, or it could be long-term demographic change already rearing its head).

I would say that a Huckabee/Romney loss would have accelerated this discussion, since the Republican party would have fielded a candidate that "fit the mold" of their ideal candidate. And since the ideal candidate lost, there would then be greater debate on whether the current "ideal" and associated strategies should be challenged.

Since McCain does not play as well to the party base, a McCain loss would likely delay this discussion. The recriminations would first be about whether a McCain ticket was the right ticket to successfully implement Republican electoral strategy, rather than whether that strategy was optimal in the first place.

If the Republican losses (if any) are due to short-term circumstances, perhaps it doesn't matter. But if there are real and lasting shifts in national opinion and demographics (e.g., appealing primarily to white-conservatives may not be enough, moving forward, if the voting pool is becoming less white), the Republicans will have to retool if they want to win long-term. McCain on the ticket (whether he wins or loses), delays this retooling.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Then you better call the cavalry. Where are you pulling your numbers from? A guess?

I think, my prediction, is that you'll truly have to rethink your ability to analyze and predict when this thing is over.

My prediction is that MBBF is too chickenshit to post one.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Then you better call the cavalry. Where are you pulling your numbers from? A guess?

I think, my prediction, is that you'll truly have to rethink your ability to analyze and predict when this thing is over.

If Obama wins by 7 it will only be because the election oversampled Obama voters.

[Flasch186]

LOL

[Crim]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Just for the heck of it, want to trade batches for a few years?

funny!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Then you better call the cavalry. Where are you pulling your numbers from? A guess?

I think, my prediction, is that you'll truly have to rethink your ability to analyze and predict when this thing is over.

The information is readily available in this thread and most will tell you that I've restated it far too often, so I'm shocked that you haven't seen it yet. Basically stated, the weights being assigned in polling data are overstated in the favor of the Democrats by a margin much larger than it should be. I've provided a plethora of statistical data to back up my claim. Feel free to go through it if you choose to do so, but don't act like I haven't used information to back up my claim. That's simply not true.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

My prediction is that MBBF is too chickenshit to post one.

Y'know, that was pretty much uncalled for.

I don't recall any requirement for a prediction being a part of this thread, and what difference does some wild ass guess from anybody here actually make? Let's be real, this thread is ultimately for entertainment purposes only and if coming up with a concrete prediction doesn't entertain somebody {shrug}.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

If Obama wins by 7 it will only be because the election oversampled Obama voters.

Truer words may never have been spoken.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

My prediction is that MBBF is too chickenshit to post one.

Ah, to be 27 again, be right all the time, and instigate pissing matches on a message board. Those were the days.

For the record, my wealth of knowledge is only exceeded by my wife (who is always right) and my child (who is sure she is always right).

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by molson

I didn't mean to say I thought you were a sheep and/or whatever else. I don't remember exactly what set me off but apologize for any offense.

No worries man. I know tensions get a bit heated in this thread at times, but we've always enjoyed good dialogue in other threads, and I'd certainly buy you a beer if we met up. I honestly didn't take any offense at all. Steamed for a minute, and Foz tried to get me worked up, but I said "nah, molson's an alright guy, no worries"

Probably could have removed your name in my most recent post and just said "just fyi everyone" or whatever

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Y'know, that was pretty much uncalled for.

I don't recall any requirement for a prediction being a part of this thread, and what difference does some wild ass guess from anybody here actually make? Let's be real, this thread is ultimately for entertainment purposes only and if coming up with a concrete prediction doesn't entertain somebody {shrug}.

+1

pretty much uncalled for Fighter of Foo

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

The information is readily available in this thread and most will tell you that I've restated it far too often, so I'm shocked that you haven't seen it yet. Basically stated, the weights being assigned in polling data are overstated in the favor of the Democrats by a margin much larger than it should be. I've provided a plethora of statistical data to back up my claim. Feel free to go through it if you choose to do so, but don't act like I haven't used information to back up my claim. That's simply not true.

right, the polls are crap. The poll of polls is crap. and the poll of the poll of the polls simply exacerbates the problem since the poll of the poll of the polls was run by the liberal media. gotcha.


EDIT: unless the poll is used to show that McCain is making a comeback.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

And among those who call the candidates' age an important factor in their vote, more, 61 percent, say Palin makes them less likely to back McCain.[/i]

But isn't that like saying that among people who were not going to vote for McCain, they also are not going to vote for Palin?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Crim

But isn't that like saying that among people who were not going to vote for McCain, they also are not going to vote for Palin?

Nah.

They're just not going to vote for McCain.
They're really not going to vote for Palin.

[Fighter of Foo]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Ah, to be 27 again, be right all the time, and instigate pissing matches on a message board. Those were the days.

For the record, my wealth of knowledge is only exceeded by my wife (who is always right) and my child (who is sure she is always right).

Just if you, me or anyone wants to go on pontificating for weeks upon end about what's going to happen and why, one should at least be willing to back it up.

That goes for anything.

Take the poll I posted about above. If it's wrong then show me! I'd be happy to see what was wrong and where.

As we say in finance, Hope ain't a strategy.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Ask a conservative why we should be in Iraq and the answer you will receive is some version of "because Bush was right."

Modified to indicate an equally unsupported view from the left.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Obviously we must encounter different liberals.

I run into more here (Georgia, not FOFC) who couldn't spell "drill" nor find Alaska on the map.

FWIW, your liberals sound like my conservatives here in Illinois (especially in the collar counties).

Maybe we could say that there are idiots of every political persuasion?

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I will say this that while McCain has run one of the worst Campaigns Ive ever witnessed

Interesting idea. Was McCain 2008 a worse campaign than Dole 1996, Dukakis 1988, Mondale 1984 or Carter 1980 (I'm going to assume these are the ones in your lifetime)?

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And for our D's, I'm not suggesting this is an entirely unique situation by any means. I'm sure demotivated D's stayed home in the past, the difference being that I don't think it was so much because of the dissatisfaction with your nominee at the time.

Gore 2000 springs to mind, honestly. Of course, if you were to draw a distinction between demotivated (GOP voters in 2008) and unmotivated (Democrat voters in 2000) then yes, it's not the same.

Carter 1980 was probably a case of "demotivated", though.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

If McCain loses, the fight between Huckabee and Palin for the religious right will be brutal.

I'm going to disagree. Huckabee's a much better politician with a quasi-national network already in place, and hasn't received anywhere near the amount of negative press Palin has already. In a hypothetical nomination race I think he wins over their shared base, and also picks up some GOP moderates.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by molson

I feel dirty when I try to argue how ridiculous it is that someone with Obama's weak credentials is this close to the presidency (I put him at approximately the 150th most qualified Democrat in the US). You just can't say that with a straight face when McCain goes with Palin as VP.

An excellent point, and one I've made angrily to my friends after the Palin pick was announced. I like Sarah, I just think that her inexperience really hurts the campaign, because it takes the "Obama's not ready" discussion off the table.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

right, the polls are crap. The poll of polls is crap. and the poll of the poll of the polls simply exacerbates the problem since the poll of the poll of the polls was run by the liberal media. gotcha.

EDIT: unless the poll is used to show that McCain is making a comeback.

Once again, that's simply not true. I have been very consistent in saying that there was a bias in the polls. Not once have I used any motivation regarding McCain or a comeback as a basis for that reasoning. I have used the information available to back up my claim. Not only that, but I called out the recent Fox poll as having a weight that was also inconsistently weighted towards Republicans, but don't let that get in the way of another rant based on emotion rather than actual discussion based on the statistical analysis being provided by multiple sources.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

If Obama wins by 7 it will only be because the election oversampled Obama voters.

You jest, but I fear this exact thing.

[flere-imsaho]

I'll say this for the 4085th time in these threads over the past two years (JPhillips has said it a lot) but

judgment + character > experience

especially given that the relevant "experience" for President has proven difficult to define.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

It's nice to see that not only the left has difficulty admitting it has lost an election.

{scratches head}

Maybe I've missed something but I think I've seen a grand total of one prediction of McCain victory all day here.

Margin? I absolutely believe it'll be influenced by vote fraud.
Outcome? Haven't seen that asserted here.

[Autumn]

Obama as a nod to the extreme left? You obviously don't hang around with many liberals if that's your slant. I am an independent of the extreme left persuasion, and I can tell you that from our point of view Obama is very close to center.

It seems to me Palin as VP was a choice that just accentuated the polarization of hte country. It seems to me that the GOP base is enthusiastic about her, as seen by those living in my area. And the democrat base is completely turned off by her. The amount of mania in one group feeds the mania in the other.

I'm not sure how much effect she's having on those who weren't already decidedly in one camp or another.

[flere-imsaho]

BTW, I don't want to prematurely cut this thread short, but maybe we should start to migrate conversation over to the "Who Did you Vote For thread for results?

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

right, the polls are crap. The poll of polls is crap. and the poll of the poll of the polls simply exacerbates the problem since the poll of the poll of the polls was run by the liberal media. gotcha.


EDIT: unless the poll is used to show that McCain is making a comeback.

It pains me to agree with Flasch on anything politics-related ( ), but this sickens me from both sides. You get the talking heads on the left and right downplaying the import or accuracy of any poll that does not favor them, and trumpeting it from the highest hill if they find even one poll to cherry-pick that supports their agenda.

Sean Hannity is the absolute worst of the bunch in this regard, IMO.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nah.

They're just not going to vote for McCain.
They're really not going to vote for Palin.

heh

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Margin? I absolutely believe it'll be influenced by vote fraud.
Outcome? Haven't seen that asserted here.

I think Crim's probably the first, at least here at FOFC.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

It's nice to see that not only the left has difficulty admitting it has lost an election.

I haven't seen a single prediction where someone said McCain WOULD win. Link? From what I've seen, I think the left still has that in the bag.

[Crim]

Originally Posted by Fighter of Foo

Just if you, me or anyone wants to go on pontificating for weeks upon end about what's going to happen and why, one should at least be willing to back it up.

That goes for anything.

Take the poll I posted about above. If it's wrong then show me! I'd be happy to see what was wrong and where.

As we say in finance, Hope ain't a strategy.

Oh yeah? How about Change?

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Once again, that's simply not true. I have been very consistent in saying that there was a bias in the polls. Not once have I used any motivation regarding McCain or a comeback as a basis for that reasoning. I have used the information available to back up my claim. Not only that, but I called out the recent Fox poll as having a weight that was also inconsistently weighted towards Republicans, but don't let that get in the way of another rant based on emotion rather than actual discussion based on the statistical analysis being provided by multiple sources.

Thats horseshit. When a 1 day poll came out showing a tightening race in some state you threw it on the wall and touted it. You mentioned nothing when the same poll came out a few days later showing an enormous spread.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Crim

It pains me to agree with Flasch on anything politics-related ( ), but this sickens me from both sides. You get the talking heads on the left and right downplaying the import or accuracy of any poll that does not favor them, and trumpeting it from the highest hill if they find even one poll to cherry-pick that supports their agenda.

To be fair, that hasn't occurred in this thread. Flasch obviously hasn't been paying attention to my posts if he thinks that I was presenting my statistical analysis solely with the intention of painting a better picture for McCain. That's simply not the case.

But I agree with you that the talking heads on both sides are only presenting the cases that favor their candidate.

[Flasch186]

Wow, just wow.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

{scratches head}

Maybe I've missed something but I think I've seen a grand total of one prediction of McCain victory all day here.

Margin? I absolutely believe it'll be influenced by vote fraud.
Outcome? Haven't seen that asserted here.

There hasn't been proof of large scale election fraud(enough to make a difference) in decades. Voter fraud, stealing votes, machines being hacked, etc. are all minor problems at worst.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Thats horseshit. When a 1 day poll came out showing a tightening race in some state you threw it on the wall and touted it. You mentioned nothing when the same poll came out a few days later showing an enormous spread.

And once again, that's simply not true. I have been very consistent in going over the numbers in each poll and saying how I felt about the information provided. Flere even noticed it. He started posting links for me so I could look over the raw data. I realize that you're an emotion driven poster, but your claims have no basis in truth given the discussions in this thread.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

There hasn't been proof of large scale election fraud(enough to make a difference) in decades. Voter fraud, stealing votes, machines being hacked, etc. are all minor problems at worst.

Sincerely,

Everyone in a graveyard in Chicago