View Poll Results: Predict the result of the Presidential Election

Voters
74. You may not vote on this poll
  • Obama landslide (310 + electoral votes)

    2 2.70%
  • Obama comfortable win (290-310 EVs)

    17 22.97%
  • Obama close win (279-290 EVs)

    27 36.49%
  • Obama barely wins (270 + 278 EVs)

    6 8.11%
  • Exact tie 269-269

    0 0%
  • Romney barely wins (270 + 278 EVs)

    7 9.46%
  • Romney close win (279-290 EVs)

    7 9.46%
  • Romney comfortable win (290-310 EVs)

    7 9.46%
  • Romney landslide (310 + electoral votes)

    1 1.35%
Page 58 of 99 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068 ... LastLast
Results 1,141 to 1,160 of 1980
  1. #1141
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    Is the ground game argument that this ground game is somehow urging people to not only vote, but vote early? And this somehow helps the candidate (ie. an early vote is more beneficial than a regular vote)?
    Yes, the ground game encourages early voting. Because only 57.4 percent of voting age adults cast a ballot, one can see the benefits of urging your voters to go to the polls and go early. I have heard that campaign insiders believe it is worth 2-3 percent of the final tally.

    sagegrouse

  2. #1142
    alteran is offline All-American, Honorable Mention
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham-- 2 miles from Cameron, baby!
    Quote Originally Posted by Reisen View Post
    No, saw the stats, but my point was why would early voting swing heavily Democratic. That is, why it wouldn't be representative of the regular voting #s (and I don't think anyone is anticipating Obama pulling in 76% of Ohio.

    The point has been made that absentee voting swings R,and a hypothesis given for why, that seems to make sense.

    Is the ground game argument that this ground game is somehow urging people to not only vote, but vote early? And this somehow helps the candidate (ie. an early vote is more beneficial than a regular vote)?
    Why the early vote skews Democratic:

    - it allows people with jobs that aren't "vote-friendly" to avoid the post-workday crunch
    - in many urban areas, the post 5pm crunch has reputedly led to people leaving lines that ran for hours and hours
    - the group that benefits most from early voting-- working class voters in historically line-prone districts, are heavily democratic
    - the democratic party, aware of these factors, has really emphasized early voting in their get-out-the-vote operations

    Hence the skew.

  3. #1143
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Both the Obama and Romney campaigns are worried that Candy Crowley is going to hit them with hard follow-up questions in the debate on Tuesday.

    But in an interview on her own network on Oct. 5, Crowley said would not be afraid to ask follow-up questions if necessary.

    "Once the table is kind of set by the town-hall questioner, there is then time for me to say, 'Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?'" Crowley said.
    If the campaigns are worried about the moderator, I see that as a very good thing!

    -Jason "Candy is smart, she won't let either candidate lie or fib" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  4. #1144
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lompoc, West Carolina
    ...And, according to my late brother, she was a "hoot" to share a few drinks with.

  5. #1145
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    If the campaigns are worried about the moderator, I see that as a very good thing!
    Or a very bad thing.

    I doubt the Romney camp is actually worried about Crowley. If they are, it's a waste of energy.

  6. #1146
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by Duvall View Post
    Or a very bad thing.

    I doubt the Romney camp is actually worried about Crowley. If they are, it's a waste of energy.
    Romney's biggest stumbles is when he is pushed off-script. He does not do well when pinned down. JMO.

  7. #1147

    the electoral map

    It's obvious that Romney has closed the gap on Obama since the first debate, but the RCP Electoral Map (whih averages all the polls) still has Obama winning with 294 EVs if the election were today (and the vote reflects the poll average). Obviously, a bunch of states are within the margin or error. FWIW, Nate Silver, who had Obama dropping from 85 percent favorite before the first debate to 63 percent last weekend, now has him back up to 66 percent. Intrade, which had Obama going at almost $8 a share before the first debate is down to $6.21 ... a big drop, but still making him the favorite.

    It looks like Romney has made up much more ground in Florida and North Carolina -- although both states are still rated as tossups, Romney now has the lead in the poll averages in both states. Obama is still slightly on top in Ohio and Virginia.

    Two states that are really interesting are Michigan and Pennsylvania. The polls show Obama with narrow leads in both states -- narrow enough that the RCP map rates both states in the tossup category, although Obama is leading.

    But I saw a summary of campaign spending over the last week and while both camps are putting huge sums into Florida and Ohio and lesser (but still large) sums into North Carolina, Colorado and Virginia, neither campaign made a single local buy in either Michigan or Pennsylvania (although voters in those states do get some national ads). The lack of action by either camp would seem to suggest that neither state is really in play.

    Anyway, that's my take on the state of the race going into the second debate. Romney was getting blown out befiore the first debate ... his performance two weeks ago changed he race.

    The question is will be be able to get a similar bump tomorrow night? If he does, he'll suddenly be the frontrunner.

  8. #1148
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post

    It's obvious that Romney has closed the gap on Obama since the first debate, but the RCP Electoral Map (whih averages all the polls) still has Obama winning with 294 EVs if the election were today (and the vote reflects the poll average). Obviously, a bunch of states are within the margin or error. FWIW, Nate Silver, who had Obama dropping from 85 percent favorite before the first debate to 63 percent last weekend, now has him back up to 66 percent. Intrade, which had Obama going at almost $8 a share before the first debate is down to $6.21 ... a big drop, but still making him the favorite.

    It looks like Romney has made up much more ground in Florida and North Carolina -- although both states are still rated as tossups, Romney now has the lead in the poll averages in both states. Obama is still slightly on top in Ohio and Virginia.

    Two states that are really interesting are Michigan and Pennsylvania. The polls show Obama with narrow leads in both states -- narrow enough that the RCP map rates both states in the tossup category, although Obama is leading.

    But I saw a summary of campaign spending over the last week and while both camps are putting huge sums into Florida and Ohio and lesser (but still large) sums into North Carolina, Colorado and Virginia, neither campaign made a single local buy in either Michigan or Pennsylvania (although voters in those states do get some national ads). The lack of action by either camp would seem to suggest that neither state is really in play.

    Anyway, that's my take on the state of the race going into the second debate. Romney was getting blown out befiore the first debate ... his performance two weeks ago changed he race.

    The question is will be be able to get a similar bump tomorrow night? If he does, he'll suddenly be the frontrunner.

    The guys at First Read have been find of analogizing the race to a football game and dividing it into four quarters:

    1st quarter -- late spring and early summer months,a fter Romney effectively clinched the nomination

    2nd quarter -- late summer and Romney's VP selection

    3rd quarter -- conventions and September

    4th quarter -- debates and closing arguments (October and early November)


    They scored the game 14-13 Obama at halftime (i.e., going into the conventions), which I think is about right. Then they said that Obama got a couple of unanswered touchdowns in the third quarter. At the time, I thought that was overstated -- I scored it more like 24-16 Obama at the end of the third. We're now in the fourth quarter -- my read is that Romney started off the quarter with a pick six and a two-point conversion to tie the game, then got another turnover on Obama's next possession. Obama's defense forced a punt around midfield and now has the ball again (good), but he's pretty deep in his own territory (still in danger; another mistake could be very costly).

  9. #1149
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom B. View Post
    The guys at First Read have been find of analogizing the race to a football game and dividing it into four quarters:

    1st quarter -- late spring and early summer months,a fter Romney effectively clinched the nomination

    2nd quarter -- late summer and Romney's VP selection

    3rd quarter -- conventions and September

    4th quarter -- debates and closing arguments (October and early November)


    They scored the game 14-13 Obama at halftime (i.e., going into the conventions), which I think is about right. Then they said that Obama got a couple of unanswered touchdowns in the third quarter. At the time, I thought that was overstated -- I scored it more like 24-16 Obama at the end of the third. We're now in the fourth quarter -- my read is that Romney started off the quarter with a pick six and a two-point conversion to tie the game, then got another turnover on Obama's next possession. Obama's defense forced a punt around midfield and now has the ball again (good), but he's pretty deep in his own territory (still in danger; another mistake could be very costly).
    I'm figuring this game ends on a passing play into the end-zone that gets intercepted, yet ruled a touchdown by one ref and incomplete by the other.

  10. #1150
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA
    So where do we stand?

    Well, in my opinion, Obama cannot win the debate tonight (not unless Romney completely tanks it, which will not happen)...the best he can do is tie. I think that's likely to happen. Like the VP debate both sides will claim their person did fine. Both sides will claim that Obama was more with it. Romney will probably take a dig at Obama's first debate performance (as Ryan did). If that happens, then everything kind of stays the same, with both men virtually tied, and really close in the swing states.

    But, if Obama doesn't tie, this thing is over, and Romney will smoke him in 3 weeks.

    My prediction, a draw.

    All that said, I'm simply amazed that the Libya thing has turned into the political nightmare it has for Obama. It's pretty obvious that Romney jumped on it and made it political at the beginning, when doing so was pretty insensitive...but somehow the press has allowed this story to have legs, and pretty much it's all bad news for Obama. I see it as an awful thing that happened, in a tough part of the world - not really anyone's fault. The media seems to now accept that this was a major gaffe by the Obama administration, and that is certainly hurting him along foreign policy.

  11. #1151
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Quote Originally Posted by Udaman View Post
    So where do we stand?

    Well, in my opinion, Obama cannot win the debate tonight (not unless Romney completely tanks it, which will not happen)...the best he can do is tie. I think that's likely to happen. Like the VP debate both sides will claim their person did fine. Both sides will claim that Obama was more with it. Romney will probably take a dig at Obama's first debate performance (as Ryan did). If that happens, then everything kind of stays the same, with both men virtually tied, and really close in the swing states.

    But, if Obama doesn't tie, this thing is over, and Romney will smoke him in 3 weeks.

    My prediction, a draw.

    All that said, I'm simply amazed that the Libya thing has turned into the political nightmare it has for Obama. It's pretty obvious that Romney jumped on it and made it political at the beginning, when doing so was pretty insensitive...but somehow the press has allowed this story to have legs, and pretty much it's all bad news for Obama. I see it as an awful thing that happened, in a tough part of the world - not really anyone's fault. The media seems to now accept that this was a major gaffe by the Obama administration, and that is certainly hurting him along foreign policy.
    I don't see any way that Romney takes a dig at Obama's first debate performance. Nobody will like that -- undignified, condescending, etc. What wouldn't surprise me is Obama making a self-deprecating joke about his first debate performance, not only to break the ice and relax, but also to humanize himself, i.e. we all can have a bad day at work, can't we?

    I'm sure the media will do whatever they can to spin this second debate as a draw, unless they just can't do it because it went so obviously in one candidate's direction or the other, like the first debate did. In the absence of that, the media will sell it as a draw, because that keeps the horse race going. If either candidate registers a clear "win" tonight, he is going to be in very, very good shape in this race.

    It'll be interesting to see what happens if Libya comes up. Obama is likely to be more aggressive in general, and we'll see if he takes Romney to task for politicizing the tragedy, or if he reverts to something more passive, like "it was a tragedy and we're still gathering the facts." That'll have his supporters' eyeballs rolling.

  12. #1152
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by tommy View Post
    I don't see any way that Romney takes a dig at Obama's first debate performance. Nobody will like that -- undignified, condescending, etc. What wouldn't surprise me is Obama making a self-deprecating joke about his first debate performance, not only to break the ice and relax, but also to humanize himself, i.e. we all can have a bad day at work, can't we?
    I can't see how Obama can bring up the first debate without it being used immediately as an attack ad against him. Remember the old "who do you want to get the call at 3am?" ads? I would see something similar to "what if emergency X happens on his next 'bad day'?" I think he tries to bring the right energy tonight and move forward, not acknowledging the last debate in any way.

  13. #1153
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by mkirsh View Post
    I can't see how Obama can bring up the first debate without it being used immediately as an attack ad against him. Remember the old "who do you want to get the call at 3am?" ads? I would see something similar to "what if emergency X happens on his next 'bad day'?" I think he tries to bring the right energy tonight and move forward, not acknowledging the last debate in any way.
    A president who has been in office for 4 years is not very vulnerable to the "what if he gets an emergency call?" attack. That attack hits at whether the person is competent and experienced enough to be president. Experience is a given and I don't think anyone but the most fervent Romney supporters would argue that Obama is incompetent at this point.

    -Jason "that said, I doubt Obama makes a joke about his poor performance in the previous debate" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  14. #1154
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    I really hesitated to post anything about this, as I fear some will see it as partisan. Let me just say that I would be critical of either campaign for a gaffe like this.

    Paul Ryan apparently went to an Ohio soup kitchen over the weekend. The soup kitchen was empty at the time, no homeless people were being served. There were also no dirty dishes in need of being cleaned. But, Ryan's people wanted a photo op so they had him wash some already clean pots and pans. He met with some of the soup kitchen volunteers, which was his stated reason for visiting, and then left. On his way out, he saw some homeless people standing in line for the next meal and spoke with them for a few moments, but reporters were not allowed to listen in on that conversation.

    It is a kinda sleazy to stage a photo op like this at a place where serious, meaningful work is being done to help society's neediest. But, what really surprises me is that it now appears the Ryan camp did not get advance clearance to be at the soup kitchen. They just showed up and someone let them in. The person who operates the charity says the visit has endangered the soup kitchen's status as a non-political organization and could end up costing them some donors. He says he would never have allowed Ryan or any politician to visit had he been asked about it.

    "They showed up there and they did not have permission," he said. "They got one of the volunteers to open up the doors." Antag added that Ryan and his family "did nothing" while on the premises.

    "He just came in here to get his picture taken at the dining hall," he said.
    I doubt this blows up into too much of a problem, especially with the debate likely to crowd all other news out of the headlines for the next couple days, but it strikes me as lazy and really poor planning on the part of Ryan's organization. More proof of that-- Ryan is wearing a tie in the pictures and his kitchen apron is pristine. If his planners were smart, they would have "messed him up" a bit to make it seem more realistic. No one cleans genuinely dirty dishes in a tie!?!



    --Jason "again, non partisan... if Biden did this I would be all over him too" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  15. #1155
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I don't think anyone but the most fervent Romney supporters would argue that Obama is incompetent at this point.

    -Jason "that said, I doubt Obama makes a joke about his poor performance in the previous debate" Evans
    I know you're a mod and you have a tough job, but I think that's pretty partisan. I'm not a Romney supporter and I think Obama has been an abysmal failure and yes, incompetent. It's not competent leadership to fly off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser while your Libyan ambassador is missing inter alia.

    As others have mentioned, those of us that don't support Obama don't feel welcome here.

    Not saying you haven't had to work hard to keep things as civil as they have been, just wanted to note that I thought the line above was a bit far.

  16. #1156
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Chicago
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    A president who has been in office for 4 years is not very vulnerable to the "what if he gets an emergency call?" attack. That attack hits at whether the person is competent and experienced enough to be president. Experience is a given and I don't think anyone but the most fervent Romney supporters would argue that Obama is incompetent at this point.

    -Jason "that said, I doubt Obama makes a joke about his poor performance in the previous debate" Evans
    I think that's being terribly optimistic.

  17. #1157
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by bluebutton View Post
    I know you're a mod and you have a tough job, but I think that's pretty partisan. I'm not a Romney supporter and I think Obama has been an abysmal failure and yes, incompetent. It's not competent leadership to fly off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser while your Libyan ambassador is missing inter alia.

    As others have mentioned, those of us that don't support Obama don't feel welcome here.

    Not saying you haven't had to work hard to keep things as civil as they have been, just wanted to note that I thought the line above was a bit far.
    Can you explain how my comment was partisan? Is suggesting that a politician is competent a partisan comment?

    It is possible that you feel I am being partisan because our standards of incompetence are different. If that is the case, I am sorry for the confusion. I think of competence as a very low hurdle to clear. Even though I am a raging liberal, the vast majority of GOP leaders and presidents would pass my standard of competence, even though I may have strongly disagreed with their policies.

    My point was not to suggest that Obama has done a good job, but merely to say that (aside from fervent Romney backers) most would consider him at least competent to do the job. That does not mean they want him to continue doing the job or that they approve of the past four years, merely that he has not bungled his way to absolute incompetence and shown an utter inability to get anything done to help the nation.

    If you think that is a partisan support for Obama, well, I am sorry and don't really know what more I can say to help you understand.

    What's more, I would add that your comments (which appear contain some strong partisan bias) betray you as someone dead set against 4 more years for Obama. It may be that you are not a fervent Romney supporter, but you are clearly strongly anti-Obama. For the purpose of the "is he at least competent?" discussion, these are one of the same. So, if you feel he is incompetent, then you fall into the group that I identified as folks who could not be swayed by anything they saw in the debate (and that was the point of this, the political value of Obama taking some blame for his debate performance).

    I am sorry if you feel anything but pro-Obama comments are not welcome here. As you know, I have worked hard to ensure that is not the case. There are numerous conservative/anti-Obama folks who have posted in this thread (though there are certainly more pro-Obama folks). I wish there would be more. I welcome them and when I cannot decide how to rule in a mildly partisan squabble, I tend to side with the Romney folks in an effort to provide as much balance as possible. Trust me, some of the finest posters in this thread have gotten infractions for me that probably left them scratching their heads.

    --Jason "I hope I have assuaged some of your concerns and am eager to see your response to how I was acting in a partisan fashion" Evans
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  18. #1158
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by bluebutton View Post
    As others have mentioned, those of us that don't support Obama don't feel welcome here.
    Ok with a little more time to think about it, I have something else to add. Forgive me, all, as I am about to rant a little bit.

    It really galls me when someone who never posts in this thread comes here and snipes with "conservative views are not allowed here."

    PROVE IT!!

    HOW DARE YOU ACCUSE ME OF SHOWING A PARTISAN BIAS IN WHAT I ALLOW AND DO NOT ALLOW IN THIS THREAD WITH NO EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP!

    What's more, how dare someone who never posts in this thread lecture me about whether they feel welcome. It is like peeking through the window of a bar, poking your head through the open door, and yelling, "ya'll won't let me in!!" EVeryone in the bar just looks around and says, "who is that and what is he talking about?"

    If there were conservative posters being challenged here or posting clearly non-partisan things and getting infractions,that would be one thing. BUT THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED AT ALL!! Every infraction or moderation I take in this thread is read and reviewed by the entire moderation team, many of whom hail from the opposite side of the political aisle as I do. I am yet to have a single action questioned by them... except perhaps some thought that I am too lenient to everyone.

    So, put up or shut up. Yes, I said it. SHUT UP ABOUT THERE BEING SOME POLITICAL BIAS IN HOW THIS THREAD IS RUN! Don't come here and say you are not welcome when you are welcome. I have repeatedly encouraged conservative posters to post more often in this thread. Saying you feel unwelcome when you are unwilling to do anything about it is your own fault and your own failing.

    -Jason "sorry, but my blood is really steaming right now" Evans

    P.S. - important note: my call for more conservatives does not mean they should post clearly partisan material. Both sides are expected to avoid that kind of thing and infractions will result when they stray outside what is allowed.
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  19. #1159
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX

    Let me try again:

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I don't think anyone but the most fervent Romney supporters would argue that Obama is incompetent at this point.

    -Jason "that said, I doubt Obama makes a joke about his poor performance in the previous debate" Evans
    What I heard: The only people who worry about Obama's competence are crazy. (Probably related to the choice of the word "fervent".

    What I thought to myself: I worry about that and I'm not crazy, why is he suggesting I'm crazy?

    How I would now translate what you wrote: Romney is after swing voters. Very few people who worry about Obama's competence are probably swing voters. He probably won't raise the issue choosing to go after other issues that independent voters are more concerned about.

    And about the Paul Ryan photo op--I agree, that's gross.

    Then about the non-Obama supporters not welcome thing -- given how much effort you put into things here, I think you are quite entitled to be steamed that I jumped in after only lurking through the posts. However, I spent 7 years closeted in a university department because non-liberals were not welcome. I feared and still fear I will be unemployable if people knew my views. So if you'll give me some slack for acting out of habit--lurking--, I apologize for not staying hidden.

  20. #1160
    Quote Originally Posted by bluebutton View Post
    I know you're a mod and you have a tough job, but I think that's pretty partisan. I'm not a Romney supporter and I think Obama has been an abysmal failure and yes, incompetent. It's not competent leadership to fly off to Las Vegas for a fundraiser while your Libyan ambassador is missing inter alia.

    As others have mentioned, those of us that don't support Obama don't feel welcome here.

    Not saying you haven't had to work hard to keep things as civil as they have been, just wanted to note that I thought the line above was a bit far.
    It was pretty competent to end the Iraq war. And it was pretty competent to kill bin Laden and al-Rahmam when it wasn't done during the previous administration. It was pretty competent to help Japan after the Tsunami and Haiti after the earthquake.

    I think that I can say that there is general bipartisan support of my views on these. I'm sure there are other instances where competence was shown by Obama.
    ~rthomas

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •