• United States Presidential Election 2012 MEGATHREAD
    2,907 replies, posted
Yes your mastery of primary school punctuation is very intimidating Well done
[video=youtube;QtoRLThQOHU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtoRLThQOHU[/video]
I'd rather have a black president with a sense of humor than a mormon robot president who agrees with whatever the media wants him to agree with.
[QUOTE=Fenrisulfr;38270877]Do not be so facile; they are much, much worse.[/QUOTE] i don't care that you write all fancy, but the only thing that annoys me is that you say 'do not' instead of 'don't'. It's really awkward to read please stop it
[QUOTE=Fenrisulfr;38270877]Do not be so facile; they are much, much worse.[/QUOTE] i'll be as fucking facile as I want to be ain't nobody gonna tell me to be facile yo
[QUOTE=TH89;38270755]Haha wow this sounds awful [editline]1st November 2012[/editline] Also, Obama's up to 79% chance of a win on 538. Woop.[/QUOTE] It's time to open the blood gates on your republican Facebook acquaintances [editline]1st November 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=BlazeFresh;38274664]i don't care that you write all fancy, but the only thing that annoys me is that you say 'do not' instead of 'don't'. It's really awkward to read please stop it[/QUOTE] Perhaps yer meager mind does fail to comprehend his superlative prose?
Fancy writing is ok when it is warranted. Facepunch is possibly the worst place to unnecessarily use fancy vocabulary.
Looking forward to voting in my first election! Missed the cut-off for 2008 by just a few months. Hope you're all turning up to your local polling stations on Tuesday. Obama is overwhelmingly supported by college-aged students (as the poll in this thread helps to indicate), but college students are notoriously unreliable voters. Practice what you preach, and go vote! Google can help you find your polling station: [url]https://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/vote[/url] If you're not already registered to vote, [I]do it right now.[/I] We're down to the wire, here!
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38281778]Looking forward to voting in my first election! Missed the cut-off for 2008 by just a few months. Hope you're all turning up to your local polling stations on Tuesday. Obama is overwhelmingly supported by college-aged students (as the poll in this thread helps to indicate), but college students are notoriously unreliable voters. Practice what you preach, and go vote! Google can help you find your polling station: [url]https://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/vote[/url] If you're not already registered to vote, [I]do it right now.[/I] We're down to the wire, here![/QUOTE] Agreed. Every vote (or well, more like every vote in swing states) counts, and it's important to remember there's more to vote for than just president! You've got congressional and state races, as well as local measures that are all the more likely to affect you.
If you haven't registered to vote in NY yet you're too late Probably the same for most other states
Is anyone else just getting super apathetic over the election and waiting for it to end? All I do is go on 538 and make sure Obama's chances are still at around 80%
[QUOTE=person11;38282034]Is anyone else just getting super apathetic over the election and waiting for it to end? All I do is go on 538 and make sure Obama's chances are still at around 80%[/QUOTE] Well there's a few propositions on the ballot here in California I care about, but the major elections don't particularly excite me because of how solidly blue this district and this state is.
Living in NY sure is exciting as a Democrat. I really wonder if we'll get the vote this year!!!
[QUOTE=person11;38282034]Is anyone else just getting super apathetic over the election and waiting for it to end? All I do is go on 538 and make sure Obama's chances are still at around 80%[/QUOTE] I guarauntee that Obama will not win with an 80% majority. :/ About 86% of every vote cast in the election is decided before a candidate even steps forward, and that is split damn near straight down the middle between the Democrats and Republicans. The people who really decide the election are that last 14%--and in the states where the balance is even enough for those votes to matter. The swing states, like Missouri. I live in Missouri, so I'm really hoping voter turnout is high! A higher voter turnout means a greater population of lower-class and younger voters, who tend to vote for the Democratic side of things. Republican voters are traditionally older white males from upper class and upper middle-class brackets, but while they're comparitively outnumbered, they are [I]very consistent.[/I] This election will come down to how many people actually show up to vote, more than anything else. Unfortunately, I predict that my state goes Red this year. At least, my city probably will. But I guess we'll see! I'll be at the polls to throw my lot in, that's for sure. I've got a lot at stake, here!
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282149]I guarauntee that Obama will not win with an 80% majority. :/[/QUOTE] I think he meant Obama's % of winning, not his vote majority
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282149]I guarauntee that Obama will not win with an 80% majority. :/[/QUOTE] 538's not predicting an 80% majority, just an 80% likelihood that Obama will win the election. [editline]2nd November 2012[/editline] noooooooooooo
OH, I gotcha. Misunderstood what he was saying! [editline]1st November 2012[/editline] I feel like the most dangerous thing for Obama right now is this complacency, though. This mentality that "Obama's got it in the bag," could lead to many potential voters choosing not to go to the polls, because they feel like it isn't necessary. [editline]1st November 2012[/editline] One thing you've got to give the Republican party, they've basically got the "old white guy" vote cinched, and old people are ridiculously reliable voters. A bunch of old farts who haven't missed a single local election since the day they were eligible to vote could just beat out the "passionate but unreliable" college crowd, if we all just shrug and say, "nah, we're fine."
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282149]I guarauntee that Obama will not win with an 80% majority. :/ About 86% of every vote cast in the election is decided before a candidate even steps forward, and that is split damn near straight down the middle between the Democrats and Republicans. The people who really decide the election are that last 14%--and in the states where the balance is even enough for those votes to matter. The swing states, like Missouri. I live in Missouri, so I'm really hoping voter turnout is high! A higher voter turnout means a greater population of lower-class and younger voters, who tend to vote for the Democratic side of things. Republican voters are traditionally older white males from upper class and upper middle-class brackets, but while they're comparitively outnumbered, they are [I]very consistent.[/I] This election will come down to how many people actually show up to vote, more than anything else. Unfortunately, I predict that my state goes Red this year. At least, my city probably will. But I guess we'll see! I'll be at the polls to throw my lot in, that's for sure. I've got a lot at stake, here![/QUOTE] Sorry, but since when, in recent history, has Missouri been a swing state? All the polls show it's pretty solidly for Romney.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282214]OH, I gotcha. Misunderstood what he was saying! [editline]1st November 2012[/editline] I feel like the most dangerous thing for Obama right now is this complacency, though. This mentality that "Obama's got it in the bag," could lead to many potential voters choosing not to go to the polls, because they feel like it isn't necessary.[/QUOTE] Yeah, complacency is definitely bad. On the other hand, most of the major pundits have been pushing the "they're neck and neck! it's a tossup! it's anyone's guess who could win!" and have actually been attacking 538's Nate Silver due to the confidence with which he's making his predictions. I feel like anyone who's politically apathetic enough to not vote if they think Obama has it in the bag is probably not going to be following 538. So they're probably mostly going to be hearing that frantic hedging from the pundits instead.
[QUOTE=Megafan;38282447]Sorry, but since when, in recent history, has Missouri been a swing state? All the polls show it's pretty solidly for Romney.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.accuracy.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Picture-2.png[/img]
538 has Missouri at a 99.5% chance of going red this election. But who knows!
[QUOTE=TH89;38282507]538 has Missouri at a 99.5% chance of going red this election. But who knows![/QUOTE] [url]http://www.270towin.com/states/Missouri[/url] Year: Democrat / Republican 2008: 49% / 49% 2004: 46% / 53% 2000: 47% / 50% 1996: 48% / 41% 2008: R 2004: R 2000: R 1996: D 1992: D Missouri's history is close enough to be considered a swing state. It generally goes Republican, but it's not as consistant as the "lock" states. It's leaning right this year, and will probably go that way in the end, at least judging from the general opinion in my district and polling figures, but it's hardly a total cinch!
[QUOTE=TH89;38282463]Yeah, complacency is definitely bad. On the other hand, most of the major pundits have been pushing the "they're neck and neck! it's a tossup! it's anyone's guess who could win!" and have actually been attacking 538's Nate Silver due to the confidence with which he's making his predictions. I feel like anyone who's politically apathetic enough to not vote if they think Obama has it in the bag is probably not going to be following 538. So they're probably mostly going to be hearing that frantic hedging from the pundits instead.[/QUOTE] Well, calling a victory this early in an election is bad for two reasons: 1. If you get it wrong, you have a bunch of egg on your face. 2.(the big one) it doesn't sell ad space as well. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that viewership for news outlets gets significantly larger around the elections. When you spin the race as "neck in neck" it encourages people to check in regularly to keep up with the latest election news. This makes you or your boss more money.
What was Obama's chance of winning in 538 before the election day in 2008?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;38282621]Well, calling a victory this early in an election is bad for two reasons: 1. If you get it wrong, you have a bunch of egg on your face. 2.(the big one) it doesn't sell ad space as well. I am going to go out on a limb here and say that viewership for news outlets gets significantly larger around the elections. When you spin the race as "neck in neck" it encourages people to check in regularly to keep up with the latest election news. This makes you or your boss more money.[/QUOTE] Yeah, that's definitely true. Their job is more to get eyeballs to be right--in fact there was a study recently that found most of the major pundits aren't any more accurate than a coin toss. Nate Silver's got a lot more invested in making accurate predictions, and he has a very good record with the last Democratic Primary, the 2008 election, and the congressional elections after that. It's possible he'll be way off with his predictions this time around, but so far his statistical analysis has been very accurate.
[QUOTE=person11;38282666]What was Obama's chance of winning in 538 before the election day in 2008?[/QUOTE] I don't know if it had a % chance but it said Obama would win with 348.6 electoral votes.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282486][img]http://www.accuracy.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Picture-2.png[/img][/QUOTE] Understandable I suppose, but we can be fairly certain this year of which direction a number of these states are going to go.
[QUOTE=person11;38282666]What was Obama's chance of winning in 538 before the election day in 2008?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure--it was high, maybe mid-80s or maybe even 90s, but here's what Wikipedia has on it: [quote]In the final update of his presidential forecast model at midday of November 4, 2008, Silver projected a popular vote victory by 6.1 percentage points for Barack Obama and electoral vote totals of 349 (based on a probabilistic projection) or 353 (based on fixed projections of each state).[27]. Obama won with 365 electoral college votes, Silver's predictions matching the actual results everywhere except in Indiana and the 2nd congressional district of Nebraska, which awards an electoral vote separately from the rest of the state. His projected national popular vote differential was below the actual figure of 7.2 points. The forecasts for the Senate proved to be correct for every race. But the near stalemate in Minnesota led to a recount that was settled only on June 30, 2009. In Alaska, after a protracted counting of ballots, on November 19 Republican incumbent Ted Stevens conceded the seat to Democrat Mark Begich, an outcome that Silver had forecast on election day.[28] And in Georgia, a run-off election on December 2 led to the re-election of Republican Saxby Chambliss, a result that was also consistent with Silver's original projection.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Megafan;38282715]Understandable I suppose, but we can be fairly certain this year of which direction a number of these states are going to go.[/QUOTE] Sure, but the polls are forgetting something pretty important: [I]I'm[/I] voting this year! I don't see how I could possibly vote for a losing candidate. It just wouldn't make sense.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;38282808]Sure, but the polls are forgetting something pretty important: [I]I'm[/I] voting this year! I don't see how I could possibly vote for a losing candidate. It just wouldn't make sense.[/QUOTE] Looks like you better give Nate Silver a call then.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.