John McCain is a LOSER

Brock Windsor said:
Im not actually long McCain vs Obama, I'm playing each state longing traditional Republican strongholds and avoiding traditional blue states altogether (except 1). Im also long a few swing states because the price was just too good IMO. Missouri, Georgia, Arizona, Montana, North Car, and North Dak all look really cheap right now. Florida, Ohio, Nevada and New Mexico also look to have some upside potential longing the Republicans. Not looking for a Rep win with the last four, just trying to make 15-20 points on the swing keeping my exposure small though if the momentum shifts in the days prior I might hold them. For completeness New Hampshire is the only state I'm still holding long for the Democrats but it is overpriced at the moment.
BW
Click to expand...

Smart moves. Georgia will vote for Obama right around when Ontario votes to join the USA.
 
If Obama does win the election (IEM has him at 87% right now), what will your response be?

- Polls are right after all.
- Polls were right this time.
- Obama made a last minute push.
- Obama committed election fraud.
 
callipygian said:
If Obama does win the election (IEM has him at 87% right now), what will your response be?

- Polls are right after all.
- Polls were right this time.
- Obama made a last minute push.
- Obama committed election fraud.
Click to expand...

And if McCain wins the election, at least you can say some of the polls had them even within the margin or error. When one poll touts a 15% lead and a 3% MoE and another poll shows a 2% lead with a 3% MoE, it makes no sense to say "the polls." At least some of these polls are wrong, as far as they are predictors of the actual outcome of the election. That's something we can say with complete certainty before the election.

When you're making scientific measurements and you are using different instruments that are giving you readings outside their theoretical error limits, you don't just average them all together. Something is effed up, and you have to stop what you're doing and find out what's happening before you use that data.
 
Automatic Monkey said:
At least some of these polls are wrong
Click to expand...

Definitely true, but there's a difference between "some of the polls are wrong" and "all of the polls are wrong." If McCain were to win an election today, all of the polls would have to be wrong.

I will additionally agree that right now it is impossible to know exactly which polls are wrong. But I argue that this is neither a product of design flaw (e.g. polling people at Starbucks or NASCAR events, or saying Obama's name first all the time) nor a product of liberal conspiracy. I think the polls are accurate to what they ask (some ask to choose between two candidates, some to choose between three or four, and some give an open-ended question - so it's possible for Obama to be leading in a 2-choice poll but lagging in an open-question poll if people can't remember his name), given that the voter demographics are accurately predicted (which is, honestly, a big question in an election like this).
 
callipygian said:
Definitely true, but there's a difference between "some of the polls are wrong" and "all of the polls are wrong." If McCain were to win an election today, all of the polls would have to be wrong.
Click to expand...

Not so. Today the Gallup and Battleground polls give Obama a lead that is within their margins of error. That shows no predicted winner because you cannot know anything within your margin of error. Thus McCain can win and they will still be correct.

Furthermore, those are polls of the "popular vote" which means exactly nothing when the Electoral College convenes. As was shown in 2000, due to electoral vote distributions and the larger victory margins in blue states, a Democrat needs at least a 1% and maybe larger edge in total votes cast to expect a victory. There are also two minor candidates (McKinney and Nader) to take votes away from Obama and only one (Barr) taking them from McCain.

callipygian said:
I will additionally agree that right now it is impossible to know exactly which polls are wrong. But I argue that this is neither a product of design flaw (e.g. polling people at Starbucks or NASCAR events, or saying Obama's name first all the time) nor a product of liberal conspiracy. I think the polls are accurate to what they ask (some ask to choose between two candidates, some to choose between three or four, and some give an open-ended question - so it's possible for Obama to be leading in a 2-choice poll but lagging in an open-question poll if people can't remember his name), given that the voter demographics are accurately predicted (which is, honestly, a big question in an election like this).
Click to expand...

I think it's a combination of all that. It should be obvious that the media and certain segments of the population are heavily emotionally invested in an Obama win, and that enthusiasm may be misinterpreted as broad support. And it is ludicrous to suggest that the journalistic profession is not biased. It is possible for a biased experimenter to produce unbiased results, but it is difficult, and frankly given the political environment and the ends-justifies-the-means attitude of the Left, I cannot imagine an Osama-supporting pollster wanting to produce a poll that does anything but support his Messiah. Why should he? If he's wrong, he can just blame Bush.
 
Automatic Monkey said:
Not so. Today the Gallup and Battleground polls give Obama a lead that is within their margins of error. That shows no predicted winner because you cannot know anything within your margin of error. Thus McCain can win and they will still be correct.
Click to expand...
Its the EXIT polls that prove statistically whether black-box electronic voting is fraud. In Ohio 2004, the deciding state, the exit polls were so far off, when the black-box had no paper trail, that university statisticians said that the odds of the results being honest were 300 million to one! zg
 
Automatic Monkey said:
Today the Gallup and Battleground polls give Obama a lead that is within their margins of error ... thus McCain can win and they will still be correct.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. But it's equally likely that they'll be wrong on the other side and Obama will win by a landslide.

Automatic Monkey said:
It should be obvious that the media and certain segments of the population are heavily emotionally invested in an Obama win ... frankly given the political environment and the ends-justifies-the-means attitude of the Left
Click to expand...

Are you saying that the Right doesn't have this attitude?

Automatic Monkey said:
I cannot imagine an Osama-supporting pollster wanting to produce a poll that does anything but support his Messiah. Why should he? If he's wrong, he can just blame Bush.
Click to expand...

Why were polls showing a McCain lead a few weeks ago, then?

And why were there polls consistently showing a Bush lead in 2004?

zengrifter said:
Its the EXIT polls that prove statistically whether black-box electronic voting is fraud. In Ohio 2004, the deciding state, the exit polls were so far off, when the black-box had no paper trail, that university statisticians said that the odds of the results being honest were 300 million to one!
Click to expand...

The CNN exit polls (linked above) showed a 51% to 48% Bush win.

You can either argue that CNN is biased towards Bush, CNN manipulated their exit polls ex post facto, or simply that there was no real evidence of electronic voting fraud (at least in Ohio in 2004).

John Kerry (who arguably has the most incentive to see any challenges through) never filed a legal claim or stated publicly that he believe fraud occurred.

The only exit polls which showed a Kerry lead were early in the day, before everyone voted. Use any rationale you want - Democrats have to get up early for work and vote earlier, or Democrats are unemployed and vote during the day - but it's the final exit polls that matter. And the final exit polls are unequivocal - Bush won Ohio, fair and square (or at least as fair and as square as any other election we've had).
 
What gives you the right for any of you on this board to call him a loser ? What have you accomplished in your life ? A bunch of wana be gamblers acting like they are accomplished in their life time. Get real your could not carry his JOCK STRAP even if he let you!
 
InPlay said:
What gives you the right for any of you on this board to call him a loser ? What have you accomplished in your life ? A bunch of wana be gamblers acting like they are accomplished in their life time. Get real your could not carry his JOCK STRAP even if he let you!
Click to expand...

Don't be such a hater. Remember what I always say, "be happy and you will be a better person."

-Sonny-
 
callipygian said:
You can either argue that CNN is biased towards Bush, CNN manipulated their exit polls ex post facto, or simply that there was no real evidence of electronic voting fraud (at least in Ohio in 2004).

John Kerry (who arguably has the most incentive to see any challenges through) never filed a legal claim or stated publicly that he believe fraud occurred.
Click to expand...
You cannot rely on CNN or Kerry, both being Illuminati assets. zg
 
bjcount said:
:band2::band2::band: Dont Worry....... Be Happy... :violin::violin::toast:
:grin: BJC
Click to expand...

Don't_worry,_be_happy.jpg
 
The Latest Poll - McCain Eeks Ahead of Obama

SOURCE: THE DRUDGE REPORT -
ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error... The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all. MD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top