Electoral College Guess

• Ty Webb

  

  Since some are posting these in the Debate thread....let's have a seperate thread
• sleeper

  

  Romney will take Ohio. That's my only prediction.
• Belly35

  

  Blacks will not show up to vote and those that do will be split
• Devils Advocate

  

  Belly35;1298328 wrote:Blacks will not show up to vote and those that do will be split

  
  This is Not a prediction, it is a Pipe dream.
  
  
  
  What ya got in that pipe ol buddy?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Belly35;1298328 wrote:Blacks will not show up to vote and those that do will be split

  ?? Will they not show up or will they
  
  You can't split 0
• mucalum49

  

  Starting with this map assuming all states in blue/red stay the same I'll say Romney gets 278.
  
  Florida (29) Virginia (13) Colorado (9) Ohio (18) New Hampshire (4)
  
  If their momentum keeps up I could see them sneaking Wisconsin too but as for now I think that goes to the President.
  
  Edit: Whoops went to a meeting, came back and realized I didn't link the map I referenced.
  
  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
• Heretic

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298342 wrote:?? Will they not show up or will they
  
  You can't split 0

  I think he's saying blacks won't show up to vote, but split ones (ie: belly-talk for people who are half-black and half-some other nationality) will.
• gut

  Romney wins, and could be by a surprisingly wide margin. I'll leave it at that, I really can't hazard a guess at the electoral # because I think most, if not all, these polls we are seeing are deeply flawed. It's anyone's guess where this race really stands - but based purely on the debates and the economy, Obama is getting creamed on the central issues. The mitigating factor - which is again anyone's guess - is how big his base is, how much it's grown thanks to uncle sugar, and how many of them are actually enthusiastic enough to vote.
  
  My personal opinion is no one has a clue what the turnout numbers are going to look like and so they are are relying on 2008 turnout (because it's defensible given no one has a handle on what the turnout looks like) which likely is very generous to Obama, but could conceivably be understating the number (again, uncle sugar).
• gut

  Anyway, on election night:
  
  11:35pm CNN calls it for Romney
  11:36pm Chris Matthews commits suicide.
  11:38pm Ty posts a poll predicting an Obama landslide.
• I Wear Pants

  gut;1298359 wrote:Romney wins, and could be by a surprisingly wide margin. I'll leave it at that, I really can't hazard a guess at the electoral # because I think most, if not all, these polls we are seeing are deeply flawed. It's anyone's guess where this race really stands - but based purely on the debates and the economy, Obama is getting creamed on the central issues. The mitigating factor - which is again anyone's guess - is how big his base is, how much it's grown thanks to uncle sugar, and how many of them are actually enthusiastic enough to vote.
  
  My personal opinion is no one has a clue what the turnout numbers are going to look like and so they are are relying on 2008 turnout (because it's defensible given no one has a handle on what the turnout looks like) which likely is very generous to Obama, but could conceivably be understating the number (again, uncle sugar).

  Why?
• Ty Webb

  

  I'm not trying to start trouble here...but I honestly don't see a path to victory for Romney here in Ohio. I'll tell you guys...I'm an intern for the Obama campaign and I have access to internal polls,and I just don't see how Romney can win Ohio
  
  And gut....I could same the same for you,but replace Mathews with Hannity,and me with Quaker
• Heretic

  

  I Wear Pants;1298435 wrote:Why?

  Because any time that anything looks to be in favorite of the "D" guy, all the "R" guy's followers immediately contend the polls are flawed or the media is biased or something along those lines. It's like clockwork.
  
  Sometimes, if you're lucky, they'll follow that up with a link to breitbart or another notable conservative blog/news organization to show how they have completely unbiased support to substantiate what they said.
• Belly35

  

  Ty Webb;1298436 wrote:I'm not trying to start trouble here...but I honestly don't see a path to victory for Romney here in Ohio.

  Ty Webb;1298436 wrote:I'm an intern for the Obama campaign

  This is why
• gut

  Ty Webb;1298436 wrote: And gut....I could same the same for you,but replace Mathews with Hannity,and me with Quaker

  No, I will do just fine if Obama wins. Might even be better for my business (I work with failing companies).
  
  But here's why the polls are flawed. Ignoring the 2008 turnout baseline - which no one believes will be repeated - there's internal inconsistencies. There's no way, for example, a sound poll can have Obama leading and then getting crushed on the economy/fiscal issues given the state of the country. I'm not calling it outright or intentional manipulation, but it's clearly garbage-in/garbage-out. It's also pretty ridiculous to go back to April or whatever and have any repub <40% and have the movement we've seen. These polls have been junk all along (and I won't even go into the self-identification of "likely voter").
  
  And you work for the Obama campaign? Shocking. You do realize you suckers are ground-zero for the propaganda, right? Lose enthusiasm among your volunteers and you are dead. I mean, just look at what you've been doing on an almost daily basis here for 6 months - posting poll after poll (only the ones that support your case) and claiming Romney is done. Do you honestly believe the people above you aren't doing the exact same thing with you and other volunteers?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Heretic;1298350 wrote:I think he's saying blacks won't show up to vote, but split ones (ie: belly-talk for people who are half-black and half-some other nationality) will.

  I think he meant blacks will not get to vote b/c if they show up he'll split them like a log.
• I Wear Pants

  
• I Wear Pants

  gut;1298441 wrote:No, I will do just fine if Obama wins. Might even be better for my business (I work with failing companies).
  
  But here's why the polls are flawed. Ignoring the 2008 turnout baseline - which no one believes will be repeated - there's internal inconsistencies. There's no way, for example, a sound poll can have Obama leading and then getting crushed on the economy/fiscal issues given the state of the country. I'm not calling it outright or intentional manipulation, but it's clearly garbage-in/garbage-out. It's also pretty ridiculous to go back to April or whatever and have any repub <40% and have the movement we've seen. These polls have been junk all along (and I won't even go into the self-identification of "likely voter").
  
  And you work for the Obama campaign? Shocking. You do realize you suckers are ground-zero for the propaganda, right? Lose enthusiasm among your volunteers and you are dead.

  Why not?
  
  It's possible to think the country isn't doing wonderfully and also think that Obama is the better choice between the two major candidates.
• Ty Webb

  

  gut;1298441 wrote:No, I will do just fine if Obama wins. Might even be better for my business (I work with failing companies).
  
  But here's why the polls are flawed. Ignoring the 2008 turnout baseline - which no one believes will be repeated - there's internal inconsistencies. There's no way, for example, a sound poll can have Obama leading and then getting crushed on the economy/fiscal issues given the state of the country. I'm not calling it outright or intentional manipulation, but it's clearly garbage-in/garbage-out. It's also pretty ridiculous to go back to April or whatever and have any repub <40% and have the movement we've seen. These polls have been junk all along (and I won't even go into the self-identification of "likely voter").
  
  And you work for the Obama campaign? Shocking. You do realize you suckers are ground-zero for the propaganda, right? Lose enthusiasm among your volunteers and you are dead.

  
  So I take it you are buying the Gallup poll with Romney +7?? Talk about bullshit
  
  And for your slam on our vols.....we have had a huge surge in vols since the first debate
• Heretic

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1298442 wrote:I think he meant blacks will not get to vote b/c if they show up he'll split them like a log.

  I don't know...he's probably big into the whole bugaboo about voter fraud, so he might be worried that if he splits them like a log, someone will just wind up counting them as two Obama votes.
• Ty Webb

  

  I Wear Pants;1298443 wrote:

  
  I could see this happening very easily....although I see Obama taking Nevada
• gut

  And what is the point, really, of constantly hammering people with polling data? Why would anyone skew a poll or ignore bias? Why do these new polls from sources unknown pop-up all the time?
  
  The only thing they hope to accomplish is to discourage or demoralize potential voters for the opposition. That's why Ty Webb is on here on a nearly daily basis with marching orders to promote the latest favorable Obama poll. He's a volunteer schill.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Ty Webb;1298448 wrote:I could see this happening very easily....although I see Obama taking Nevada

  and Colorado
• Ty Webb

  

  gut;1298453 wrote:And what is the point, really, of constantly hammering people with polling data? Why would anyone skew a poll or ignore bias? Why do these new polls from sources unknown pop-up all the time?
  
  The only thing they hope to accomplish is to discourage or demoralize potential voters for the opposition. That's why Ty Webb is on here on a nearly daily basis with marching orders to promote the latest favorable Obama poll. He's a volunteer schill.

  You're clueless dude
• gut

  Ty Webb;1298446 wrote:So I take it you are buying the Gallup poll with Romney +7?? Talk about bull****
  
  And for your slam on our vols.....we have had a huge surge in vols since the first debate

  They are all still suckers and schills. I commend them for their service while laughing at their sheeple ignorance.
  
  I've trashed pretty much every poll. However, it is noteable when a poll presumably using a 2008 baseline has Romney about where Obama was then.
  
  But I also think there's some group-think in these polls. No one wants to be noticeably different, and no one wants to miss the mark big. If one has started to adjust their turnout projection, the others are going to fall in line. I haven't examined it, but I suspect a big part of Romney's move is that the normalization of the baseline is starting to take place.
• gut

  Ty Webb;1298456 wrote:You're clueless dude

  Says the guy who doesn't realize he's a schill for the Obama propaganda.
  
  I nailed it, didn't I? Must be pretty sobering to come to the realization how you'e being used, and how disappointed and shocked you will be in a few weeks.