Post by: Grandpa Shooter on September 03, 2008, 07:50:14 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2008, 08:08:10 PM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 03, 2008, 08:11:00 PM
I can't wait for the debates.
And Palin's youngest daughter is cute as can be. I'd vote for her over Obama or Hillary any day.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 03, 2008, 08:12:05 PM
Obama really got hammered tonight. Rudy was pretty rough with him, too.
"Being mayor of Wasilla is sort of like being a community organizer, except that the mayor has real responsibilities."
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 03, 2008, 09:30:32 PM
In the Illinois legislature Obama voted "present" 113 times. 113 times, he couldn't make a decision. I wish I knew about that "present" vote when I was mayor. When you're President, you cannot vote "present." You have to make a decision.
Post by: Lennyjoe on September 04, 2008, 01:47:57 AM
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 04, 2008, 01:49:35 AM
Post by: ilbob on September 04, 2008, 02:55:53 AM
I think this changes the dynamic of the election a lot. If McCain had selected a "moderate" or a democrat, the base of the republican party would have no enthusiasm to come out and do what it takes to win, probably resulting in a BHO presidency.
I think this changes things enough that McCain could win 45 states. I think they need to send her to places like Illinois and stir things up there forcing BHO to spend time there defending his supposed safe harbor. This could have coat tail effects as well. Might pickup up a couple of house and senate seats that would otherwise have been lost, maybe a governorship or a state house.
Post by: Desertdog on September 04, 2008, 03:45:39 AM
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 04, 2008, 03:48:37 AM
I saw some stupid reporters, I think it was CNN, that saw showing that Obama was going to win enough electoral votes to win the presidency. Oh, what wishful thinking.
He's got a 5% lead.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on September 04, 2008, 04:06:47 AM
And, what you tell a pollster is one thing. What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is something entirely different.
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 04, 2008, 04:09:05 AM
Polls only mean squat after the election and the one that determines who wins is the only one I care about.
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 04, 2008, 04:09:25 AM
What's the margun of error for the poll?
2%.
Read here.
Post by: Ezekiel on September 04, 2008, 05:01:21 AM
That's a good link: interesting stuff.
Post by: roo_ster on September 04, 2008, 05:20:18 AM
Despite new innovations, polling is less & less accurate, despite increasing the sample size.
For instance (by no means exhaustive):
1. Bradley/Royko effect--the tendency for people polled to just plain lie (Royko) to pollsters, especially when a black (Bradley) candidate is running in a race where the constituency is largely non-black. Usually about 5% of those polled will say they are voting for / voted for the black guy when they do otherwise.
2. Cell phone effect--quick-reaction polls are limited to land-lines. With a great proportion of the population going cell-only, the sample population is skewed. Generally, the younger the person, the more likely they are cell-only. But, the younger they are, the less likely they are to actually vote.
There are other challenges, but those two seem most pertinent at the moment.
Rassmussen decreases the margin of error by using three night's worth of polling, but I do not see if they filter by registered or likely voters (likely being a better measure).
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 04, 2008, 05:27:26 AM
Post by: French G. on September 04, 2008, 05:48:33 AM
Post by: Drgong on September 04, 2008, 05:51:49 AM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 04, 2008, 07:07:25 AM
Post by: longeyes on September 04, 2008, 07:21:07 AM
She brings populism to the Grim Old Party. What a tonic.
All of a sudden this Election becomes rough fun.
Post by: French G. on September 04, 2008, 08:10:13 AM
Post by: Marnoot on September 04, 2008, 08:28:21 AM
I read the comments following the speech article on CNN, wow, either they really moderate their comments, or there really are that many mouth breathing idiots, or only me and the lefties read CNN. Hmmm. I liked the post speech photo with the whole family on stage, including preggy daughter. Seems like a pretty open challenge for anyone to screw with her.
I read some, too. I liked the one from the woman who said she cried during Palin's speech because she was so scared by it, and was terrified of the possibility of a McCain victory.
Post by: Teknoid on September 04, 2008, 09:30:27 AM
I see they polled 5% more Dems than Reps. I wonder why the numbers came out in favor of Obama.... Gee, hard to figure, isn't it?
One of the reasons the only poll that matters is the one you take in the voting booth.
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 04, 2008, 09:56:03 AM
Quote
I see they polled 5% more Dems than Reps. I wonder why the numbers came out in favor of Obama.... Gee, hard to figure, isn't it?
They polled 5% more Dems than Reps because there's slightly more registered Democrats than Republicans in society.
Post by: The Annoyed Man on September 04, 2008, 09:57:53 AM
I think that could only happen if 3 candidates get electoral college votes. Which third party candidate do you expect to win a state?
Well, pending a Texas court decision, Barr may win that state by default.
Lots of wishful thinking on the LP's part, though.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 04, 2008, 10:03:29 AM
Quote
I see they polled 5% more Dems than Reps. I wonder why the numbers came out in favor of Obama.... Gee, hard to figure, isn't it?
They polled 5% more Dems than Reps because there's slightly more registered Democrats than Republicans in society.
All pollsters try to correct their data according to the demographics of society. These corrections are supposed to make the poll results more accurate. But the corrections are subjective, they depend upon the pollster's opinions and biases. The poll results are only as good as the quality of the pollsters.
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 04, 2008, 10:13:14 AM
You're really advocating this nobody as president, or even vice president? Come on. I can see why she might make McCain more palatable for some people, but to say you're voting for her? Gah...
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 04, 2008, 10:31:59 AM
Post by: ilbob on September 04, 2008, 10:35:47 AM
I find the "cute girl who shoots guns" obsession/reaction as disturbing as the "Hip young agent of Change" obsession/reaction.
You're really advocating this nobody as president, or even vice president? Come on. I can see why she might make McCain more palatable for some people, but to say you're voting for her? Gah...
She is hardly an unknown in conservative circles. But if you spend most of your time at the DU its possible you might never have heard of her before.You're really advocating this nobody as president, or even vice president? Come on. I can see why she might make McCain more palatable for some people, but to say you're voting for her? Gah...
Ever hear of Bobby Jindal? He's another up and comer to watch for.
Post by: Desertdog on September 04, 2008, 10:36:26 AM
Post by: Tallpine on September 04, 2008, 02:49:37 PM
Quote
I can see why she might make McCain more palatable for some people, but to say you're voting for her?
Voting for her, but not for McCain
Post by: anygunanywhere on September 04, 2008, 03:22:22 PM
What's the margun of error for the poll?
And, what you tell a pollster is one thing. What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is something entirely different.
And, what you tell a pollster is one thing. What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is something entirely different.
Hasn't anyone here played "Lie to the Pollster"?
My son and I do it all the time.
Anygunanyhwere
Post by: RocketMan on September 04, 2008, 03:31:46 PM
What's the margun of error for the poll?
And, what you tell a pollster is one thing. What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is something entirely different.
And, what you tell a pollster is one thing. What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is something entirely different.
Hasn't anyone here played "Lie to the Pollster"?
My son and I do it all the time.
Anygunanyhwere
I've never been polled.
But I've been a Neilsen or Arbitron family about seven times. That is weird.
Post by: Regolith on September 04, 2008, 03:32:45 PM
Post by: Thor on September 04, 2008, 05:06:20 PM
Post by: zahc on September 06, 2008, 04:59:01 AM
Quote
Well, pending a Texas court decision, Barr may win that state by default.
plz splain? kthxbai
Post by: Tallpine on September 06, 2008, 06:02:36 AM
Quote
Well, pending a Texas court decision, Barr may win that state by default.
plz splain? kthxbai
Barr is the only one on the ballot. Neither Republicans or Democrats are on the ballot because the deadline passed before the conventions happened.
At least that's the way I heard it ....
Post by: longeyes on September 06, 2008, 06:39:05 AM
In a Republic no one is or should be.
We need to build this thing from the ground up, one active, informed citizen at a time. There are too many souls yearning to be unfree. It's disturbing.
Post by: zahc on September 06, 2008, 07:28:57 AM
Quote
Well, pending a Texas court decision, Barr may win that state by default.
plz splain? kthxbai
Barr is the only one on the ballot. Neither Republicans or Democrats are on the ballot because the deadline passed before the conventions happened.
At least that's the way I heard it ....
Wow that's very interesting. Could be bad also though, because a lot of people feel McCain is sure to win TX.
Post by: Tallpine on September 06, 2008, 07:48:51 AM
Quote
I like Palin a LOT, but she isn't the Messiah either.
The Missussiah
Post by: lacoochee on September 06, 2008, 09:23:02 AM
Post by: The Annoyed Man on September 06, 2008, 03:56:28 PM
Quote
No but for Conservatives she is a cold glass of water after 6 months in the desert.
Ron Paul must have been the oasis.
Post by: thisguy1157 on September 16, 2008, 08:59:38 PM
Quote
I see they polled 5% more Dems than Reps. I wonder why the numbers came out in favor of Obama.... Gee, hard to figure, isn't it?
They polled 5% more Dems than Reps because there's slightly more registered Democrats than Republicans in society.
I also believe those extra 5% are the voting dead. Dead people always vote democrat.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 17, 2008, 02:16:14 AM
Quote
No but for Conservatives she is a cold glass of water after 6 months in the desert.
Ron Paul must have been the oasis.
No, the mirage. Rimshot.
Post by: Modifiedbrowning on September 17, 2008, 08:39:20 PM
Post by: Lennyjoe on September 18, 2008, 03:13:33 AM
Post by: zahc on September 18, 2008, 03:40:37 AM
Ron Paul is on the ballot in Montana as the Constitution Party candidate.
I thought he promised not to run as an independent?
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 18, 2008, 04:13:28 AM
If Palin were a nobody, then you might have a point. She may be a newcomer to the national scene, but the woman is solid.
Not all that solid. Barely 2 years as governor. Mayor of a town of 7,000 people before that.
Post by: Intune on September 18, 2008, 04:51:30 AM
If Palin were a nobody, then you might have a point. She may be a newcomer to the national scene, but the woman is solid.
Not all that solid. Barely 2 years as governor. Mayor of a town of 7,000 people before that.
Post by: Jamisjockey on September 18, 2008, 05:31:38 AM
If Palin were a nobody, then you might have a point. She may be a newcomer to the national scene, but the woman is solid.
Not all that solid. Barely 2 years as governor. Mayor of a town of 7,000 people before that.
I actually would prefer Palin for President over McCain. She's a true Washington outsider and a conservative. Unfortunately, the Grand Ole Party would surround her with old washington insiders and the failed policies of the NeoCon movement would continue.
There should be a "None of the Above, try again" option. Both tickets are *expletive deleted*it.
Post by: MicroBalrog on September 18, 2008, 05:35:03 AM
Ron Paul is on the ballot in Montana as the Constitution Party candidate.
I thought he promised not to run as an independent?
That is correct, but there's some hole in Montana law that allows the local cadre to put him on the ballot anyhow.
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on September 18, 2008, 07:29:54 AM
Quote
There should be a "None of the Above, try again" option. Both tickets are *expletive deleted*it.
Be nice to have a ballot option that says:
"Both of these options suck. We the people want the current official in this office to stay for another 3 months while an emergency election campaign is organized by each party. The current candidates for this office are ineligible to run because they suck."
Sigh. Wishful thinking.
Post by: Modifiedbrowning on September 18, 2008, 10:58:45 AM
Quote
I thought he promised not to run as an independent?
He's not actually running, but because he had enough of a % in the primary he is eligible to be on the ballot. So, the local Constitution Party folks had him added. I do believe they asked his permission.While I like Ron Paul I just hope this doesn't screwover McCain and let Obama win the state.
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 19, 2008, 08:42:05 AM
If Palin were a nobody, then you might have a point. She may be a newcomer to the national scene, but the woman is solid.
Not all that solid. Barely 2 years as governor. Mayor of a town of 7,000 people before that.
Very solid. Look what she's accomplished in her short political career.
Post by: roo_ster on September 19, 2008, 10:11:07 AM
If Palin were a nobody, then you might have a point. She may be a newcomer to the national scene, but the woman is solid.
Not all that solid. Barely 2 years as governor. Mayor of a town of 7,000 people before that.
Very solid. Look what she's accomplished in her short political career.
I agree. She has more substantive political/policy accomplishments to her name than the other three combined.