How do McCain or Obama get to 270?

[whottt]

Its fine to say one or 2 polls is wrong, but when EVERY ING POLL BEING CONDUCTED shows the same thing then I don't want to hear anything about polling being wrong because thats a total crock of unfounded . They don't all use the same methodology yet they're consistently coming out with a sizeable lead in this race to Obama.

Yeah those results are the A#1 tip to me that the polls aren't accurate. I know they're showing Obama leading in some states he won't win in the GE. I know for a fact they're showing that.

Its all too easy for people to get hung up on the number of points and that one poll said Obama was up one day by 2 then McCain up by 1 the next day. What people don't realize is that on both of those days the poll showed a tie. Its almost the same way as when people look at a weather forcast. When a weatherman says there is a 30% chance of rain and then it doesn't rain they say OMG HE WAS WRONG. When a poll shows a candidate ahead by 1 and the other candidate wins by 1 they're like OMG THE POLL WAS WRONG.

Thats not the way these things work.

But by that same token, when you see a candidate up for several cycles by 5-8 points thats something worth noting and a very good indicator that tthe candidate is leading in the race by a large margin. While one or 2 polls may be inaccurate and may show results that are not consistent, they are merely outliers and the chances of the entirety of polls being incorrect by such a largin margin is small. VERY small.

I'm a poker player (so is Barack btw, legalize this biatch) and while my Aces have about a 17% chance of being cracked by any other pair preflop, I'll take it in and shove my entire stack every single time. Obama is my aces.

BTW, My bet offer is back. If anyone wants to give me 1:1 odds on McCain winning I'll take the bet.

You want my advice? Never play the PCT's on a stacked deck:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ation-191.html

[whottt]

Not only that, as much as he screws up he can actually give interviews with out a screwup. Thats something Palin has yet to prove.

I can honestly say Palin does the best interviews of any politcian I've ever seen...and the media thinks that too, which is why they are so hostile in their intervies and have to edit them.

PS: After looking at all those great Presidential Campaigns by Biden I can see where you're coming from...he ought to be called the great connector.

For awhile I thought this was some expectations game. I thought maybe McCain was trying to set the bar low so that Palin would pull off a Bush at the debates.

First impression always the best impression...that's exactly what McCain is doing.

If you think this woman is scared...you are mistaken.

[Findog]

I can honestly say Palin does the best interviews of any politcian I've ever seen...and the media thinks that too, which is they are so hostile in their intervies and have to edit them.

Oh you are such a troll! I'm starting to believe that whottt is actually an Obama supporter, and gets his rocks off pretending otherwise. I used to pretend to be a right-winger myself on Plastic.

[whottt]

Have you watched her debate?


She's got chunks of guys like Joe Biden in her stool. And I mean guys exactly like him...multiple term Senators.

These guys are so detatched from ther general public they might as well live on a different planet.

[Findog]

Have you watched her debate?


She's got chunks of guys like Joe Biden in her stool. And I mean guys exactly like him...multiple term Senators.

Alaska debates centered on Alaskan issues. And like I said, veep debates won't matter one way or the other. She can probably do better than the low expectations that have been set for her, but she needs to show she's competent and well-versed in issues and policy.

[Bartleby]

I can honestly say Palin does the best interviews of any politcian I've ever seen...and the media thinks that too, which is why they are so hostile in their intervies and have to edit them.

Wow. Just . . . wow.

Your infatuation with that woman is morbidly fascinating.

[Findog]

Biden is gonna destroy her tomorrow:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/20...946/293/617028

[ElNono]

With a bit of luck, the election ends tomorrow...

[dg7md]

During Obama's high, and the fact there is early voting going on in crucial states, this is a good sign for us.

[Findog]

Wow. Just . . . wow.

Your infatuation with that woman is morbidly fascinating.

I used to post a lot on this discussion board called plastic:

www.plastic.com

The site's user base skews liberal, and a lot of times it's just liberals in a circle jerk patting each other on the back. Not as bad as dailykos, since opposing viewpoints are welcome, and there are quite a few libertarians that post there, but the discussions can get boring. I signed up an alternate handle and began posing as a right-wing republican just to liven things up. After that post by whottt, I strongly suspect that's what he's doing here.

[Findog]

Joe Biden will do just fine:

Katie Couric: Why do you think Roe v. Wade was a good decision?

Joe Biden: Because it's as close to a consensus that can exist in a society as heterogeneous as ours. What does it say? It says in the first three months that decision should be left to the woman. And the second three months, where Roe v. Wade says, well then the state, the government has a role, along with the women's health, they have a right to have some impact on that. And the third three months they say the weight of the government's input is on the fetus being carried.

And so that's sort of reflected as close anybody is ever going to get in this heterogeneous, this multicultural society of religious people as to some sort of, not consensus, but as close it gets.

I think the liberty clause of the 14th Amendment ... offers a right to privacy. Now that's one of the big debates that I have with my conservative scholar friend, that they say, you know, unless a right is enumerated - unless it's actually, unless uses the word "privacy" in the Cons ution - then no such "cons utional right" exists. Well, I think people have an inherent right.

Couric: Are there Supreme Court decisions you disagree with?

Biden: You know, I'm the guy who wrote the Violence Against Women Act. And I said that every woman in America, if they are beaten and abused by a man, should be able to take that person to court - meaning you should be able to go to federal court and sue in federal court the man who abused you if you can prove that abuse. But they said, "no, that a woman, there's no federal jurisdiction." And I held, they acknowledged, I held about 1,000 hours of hearings proving that there's an effect in interstate commerce.
Women who are abused and beaten and beaten are women who are not able to be in the work force. And the Supreme Court said, "well, there is an impact on commerce, but this is federalizing a private crime and we're not going to allow it." I think the Supreme Court was wrong about that decision.

Here's Bible e:

Couric Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.

Couric: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Cons ution?

Palin: I do. Yeah, I do.

Couric: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.

Palin: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different cons uencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.

Couric: What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?

Palin: Well, let's see. There's, of course in the great history of America there have been rulings, that's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are those issues, again, like Roe v. Wade, where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know, going through the history of America, there would be others but ...

Couric: Can you think of any?

Palin: Well, I could think of ... any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But, you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a vice president, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today.

[whottt]

1. 62,040,610 That's the largest number of votes ever received by a Presidential Candidate. That was in 2004, and he is easily one of the most unlikeable, untrusted, polarizing Presidents in history. That was pure Patriotism producing those numbers right there....there was no other reason to vote for him.

2. 59,028,444 That's second largest number of votes ever produced by a Presidential Candidate before. That was also in 2004. That was the most ever to vote for a Democratic Presidential Candidate by some 9 million votes. That was what they could do against a guy who had zero charisma who Americans had to hold their nose and vote for, a guy who had lost the popular vote 4 years earlier.


3. 54,455,472 That's the 3rd most votes ever received by a Presidential Candidate. That's the number of voters that turned out the last time the Republicans had a likeable canidate...

24 years ago. In 1984.



America is not a leftwing country...and it's easier to vote for McCain than it was for Bush. Much much easier. The moderate always wins the popular vote.



Poll that.

[ElNono]

1. 62,040,610 That's the largest number of votes ever received by a Presidential Candidate. That was in 2004, and he is easily one of the most unlikeable, untrusted, polarizing Presidents in history. That was pure Patriotism producing those numbers right there....there was no other reason to vote for him.

2. 59,028,444 That's second largest number of votes ever produced by a Presidential Candidate before. That was also in 2004. That was the most ever to vote for a Democratic Presidential Candidate by some 9 million votes. That was what they could do against a guy who had zero charisma who Americans had to hold their nose and vote for.


3. 54,455,472] That's the 3rd most votes ever received by a Presidential Candidate. That's the number of voters that turned out the last time the Republicans had a likeable canidate...

24 years ago.



America is not a leftwing country...and it's easier to vote for McCain than it was for Bush. Much much easier.

Not after 8 years of Bush, the unpopular war, and the about-to-be-passed bailout...

[Findog]

^ Population has been increasing in this country. Thank you for that trenchant analysis whottt

[jman3000]

that reagan win was a huge landslide... so it's a little misleading saying that so many people voted for him... hardly anybody voted for the other guy.

[Findog]

that reagan win was a huge landslide... so it's a little misleading saying that so many people voted for him... hardly anybody voted for the other guy.

Not to mention that the population in this country has increased a lot since 1984.

[whottt]

^ Population has been increasing in this country.

It sure has....it's also older than it's ever been before. The largest segment of Americans. The largest voting demographic. And the Republicans are the party this Demographic tends to jump to after a certain age. The segment that is and remains the most conservative and patriotic segment of the voting populace. The segment which is clearly more in McCain's favor than Obama's...by bigger number than Bush had an advantage over Kerry.

And you guys are running on a "One Heartbeat Away from the Presidency" platform.


Simply brilliant.

Thank you for that trenchant analysis whottt

You're welcome...frankly I am surprised no one attacked one of the elections I cited. There is a clear and obvious point in the Democrats favor and against the Republicans in this election using the election results I cited..but sigh, those who get their marching orders from the mass media, the largest corporations in the world, and the Daily Kos, lack the insight to attack it. A pity I wasted time figuring out out the counter point in advance...I was obviously giving too much credit.

[Findog]

It sure has....it's also older than it's ever been before. The largest segment of Americans. The largest voting Demographic. The segment that is and remains the most conservative and patriotic segment of the voting populace.

And you guys are running on a "One Heartbeat Away from the Presidency" platform.


Simply brilliant.

Older voters aren't swinging anything for McCain. He's losing right now and the fault line is breaking for Obama. Maybe he can arrest that, but at some point the RNC is going to decide to invest money in down-ballot races and salvage some losses. Older support for McCain is already reflected in the polls. Racism against Obama is already reflected in the polls. Right now, it's not enough.

[whottt]

By the way Findog...since Shastafarian and El Nono feel compelled to post in this thread and there is zero chance of one of them getting a response from me...you might want to at least acknowledge your Komerades.

[Shastafarian]

By the way Findog...since Shastafarian and El Nono feel compelled to post in this thread and there is zero chance of one of them getting a response from me...you might want to at least acknowledge your Komerades.

I'm glad I'm getting to you enough for you to call me out so readily. Thanks.

[whottt]

Older voters aren't swinging anything for McCain. He's losing right now and the fault line is breaking for Obama. Maybe he can arrest that, but at some point the RNC is going to decide to invest money in down-ballot races and salvage some losses. Older support for McCain is already reflected in the polls. Racism against Obama is already reflected in the polls. Right now, it's not enough.

If you are truly analyzing those factors in an objective and common sensical fashion...then you should realize exactly why I am predicting a McCain landslide.

If you are truly analyzing those numbers in an objective and common sensical fashion the obvious conclusion is that the Democrats are losing voters by the boatload...career Democrats, that have never voted Republican before...while the Republicans are energized like they haven't been in decades. While the Democrats are not making gains in those areas...they are making gains in youth, African Americans and Hispanics.


Those swings indicate a Republican Landslide...

The demographic numbers don't add up to the poll results.

The weights.
Are off.

[jman3000]

but don't hispanics account for almost half of all US population growth?

if youre saying that dems are gaining ground with hispanics... id imagine that's a pretty large ass bloc.

[Findog]

If you are truly analyzing those factors in an objective and common sensical fashion...then you should realize exactly why I am predicting a McCain landslide.

If you are truly analyzing those numbers in an objective and common sensical fashion the obvious conclusion is that the Democrats are losing voters by the boatload...career Democrats, that have never voted Republican before...while the Republicans are energized like they haven't been in decades. While the Democrats are not making gains in those areas...they are making gains in youth, African Americans and Hispanics.


Those swings indicate a Republican Landslide...

The demographic numbers don't add up to the poll results.

The weights.
Are off.

I truly don't know what to say. The same polling groups that predicted a Bush win in 2004 are now showing Obama opening up and expanding his lead outside of the margin of error, and I'm supposed to trust your gut instinct about what the electorate will do. We don't even have a common base of facts upon which to base a discussion.

What do you make of the fact that McCain is beginning to hemorrhage support in the polls? Pollsters bank their money and their reps on trying to get it right. Are you suggesting Rasmussen is in the tank for Obama? Evangelical Christian Steve Rasmussen?

[whottt]

but don't hispanics account for almost half of all US population growth?

Yeap...and when they voted they voted overwhelmingly in favor of Hillary Clinton...against Obama.

if youre saying that dems are gaining ground with hispanics... id imagine that's a pretty large ass bloc.

I think those poll weights are off as well. Hispanics are lifestyle conservatives.


I've got two Mexican American Step Brothers and Mexican American Step Sister, a Mexican American Step Mom, two Great Nephews that have dual Mexico America citizenship, and a Mexican National Newphew(in law?) ...and there is a better chance of McCain voting for Obama than there is any one of them. I'm the liberal out of this grouping.


Furthermore...my own personal observation and experience...you let me know the next time you see an African American working in a Mexican or Asian Food restaurant.

[jman3000]

Furthermore...my own personal observation and experience...you let me know the next time you see an African American working in a Mexican or Asian Food restaurant.

you must have never been to memphis