lol gotta love it whenever str8foolish makes someone mad enough to post my photo

[Edited on November 2, 2012 at 4:20 PM. Reason : altho you have me to thank that the dude posts without being 5 bux poorer]

11/2/2012 4:19:45 PM

So it seems like the Republican hive mind has decided that Sandy will be their excuse for why Obama won. Romney had the election well in hand until a natural disaster came along and ruined everything for him. Awesome.

11/2/2012 4:23:57 PM

certantly not over yet

11/2/2012 4:26:02 PM

wasn't aware you were capable of posting without calling someone racist. GG.

[Edited on November 2, 2012 at 4:40 PM. Reason : ^^^]

11/2/2012 4:39:49 PM

find me a quote where I called somebody racist.

11/2/2012 4:46:16 PM

i edited to include the carets hoping to clarify i wasn't talking about you

11/2/2012 5:03:59 PM

What this message board needs is a way that we could all have a beer together and be friends.

11/2/2012 5:09:38 PM

The latest "unskewed" map of how the election is going to go:

11/2/2012 5:13:28 PM

I like the new thing kicking around the "Right". "Either Obama barely wins, Romney barely wins, or Romney wins in a blowout! 2 out of 3 outcomes have Romney winning!!!1"

11/2/2012 5:17:28 PM

Why the hell am I seeing this awful conservative commercial from some rich Hungarian telling me I live in a socialist state and to vote for Mitt during EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL BREAK.

How is that drivel supposed to work?

[Edited on November 2, 2012 at 5:22 PM. Reason : x]

11/2/2012 5:22:07 PM

So what's the prediction for Johnson? Will he hit 5%?

11/2/2012 5:23:41 PM

^^ They are trying to equate Obama with Stalin... and Hitler... and Jimmy Carter...

11/2/2012 5:31:31 PM

22 Ohio polls, 4 ties, 1 Romney lead (from Rasmussen, which today shows a tie). It all points to ~3-4% Obama lead, which was about his margin of victory 2008.

Quote :

"I like the new thing kicking around the "Right". "Either Obama barely wins, Romney barely wins, or Romney wins in a blowout! 2 out of 3 outcomes have Romney winning!!!1""

Yeah, they are delusional. Right now, the "smallest" Obama win would be 281-257. It could get as ugly as 332-206. Romney's only realistic winning EV projection is 275-263. So it's actually the exact opposite of what the "Right" is saying.

11/2/2012 5:45:14 PM

McDanger wrapping up a PhD?

11/2/2012 6:04:39 PM

Holy shit MisterGreen is a fucking moron.

11/2/2012 10:46:31 PM

Quote :

""

LOL

and there are people buying into this... wow.

11/2/2012 11:32:18 PM

Wow did hannity just slam obama for campaining with bruce springston while thr north is not fixed yet?

11/3/2012 12:11:21 AM

Mitt compained with fucking "ill have a blow job" kid rock

11/3/2012 12:14:53 AM

latest polls showing an Obama win with ease

I can dig it

11/3/2012 1:47:45 AM

^^^^ I read an article hypothesizing Romney's 'momentum' is setup for post-election litigation (Chicago cheated!) and second term obstructionism (Obama isn't the REAL president!).



I'm still on the fence on how cynical the author is.

11/3/2012 2:06:03 AM

Republican co-worker stopped making bets for Romney because he's afraid that he's too exposed on pro-Romney bets already.



His worst bet was donating the max amount to the Romney campaign, though.

11/3/2012 2:34:25 AM

Paths To VICTORY!!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/02/us/politics/paths-to-the-white-house.html

Basically, Obama has 431 paths to an electoral collage victory while Romney has 76. Of course, Romney will probably take Fla so it's really 176-75 paths to victory.

11/3/2012 7:50:40 AM

Basically, Romney has to win florida, ohio, VA, and one other to win.

11/3/2012 11:17:49 AM

Nate Silver looked adorable on TRMS last night.

BTW, something about maddow that really, really turns me on. It's these playful, curious facial expressions that she has when trying to rationalize the GOP. But alas, I have fallen for lesbians before.

[Edited on November 3, 2012 at 11:55 AM. Reason : double post]

11/3/2012 11:55:03 AM

Nate Silver brings up a good topic. What are the chances that all the polls are wrong?

11/3/2012 1:59:28 PM

He didn't bring that topic up. Republicans have been counting on the idea of ALL the polls being wrong for two weeks now.

11/3/2012 2:04:46 PM

I was referring to this article where he says all state polls have to be biased for Romney to win.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/

11/3/2012 2:09:37 PM

Shrike, Obama's margin of victory in 2008 was about twice as big as you said, and his projected margin of victory is less than two thirds of what you said.

11/3/2012 2:47:33 PM

^What? If you give him every safe blue state plus all the swing states he's likely to win, that's 281 EVs. If you also give him CO and VA (which look good for him right now) and FL (which is close enough to go either way), that's 332 EVs. NC is really the only swing state Romney can bank on.

11/3/2012 3:37:26 PM

To all of you Obama Kool-Aid drinking retards:

know this...

When the election is called for a Romney win on Tuesday night, I will pause for a moment and smile as I think about how pissed off and ashamed you feel, wherever you are, while I'm enjoying one the biggest "I told you so" moments of my life and have about $800 extra in my pocket, which most likely came from other liberal retards that were so sure Obama would win that they pushed the betting line to +350 for me

11/3/2012 6:18:19 PM

You're confident Romney is going to win because the market has Obama favored? Makes complete sense.

11/3/2012 7:39:37 PM

Once OHIO is called for Obama, it is over for Mitt....at last he will have plenty of time to prepare his speech.

11/3/2012 7:43:24 PM

^^^ that's a lovely hypothetical, but what will you do when Obama wins?

11/3/2012 7:53:10 PM

I don't trust Ohio or Florida. Florida's problems are obvious, it's just damned hard to actually cast a vote there. Plus they've already started having vote counts shift in strange ways. Ohio is just screwy, whether it's gross incompetence or something thing more organized won't get the media attention it deserves.

Either way, I think it's funny that the party who is supoosed to have a "silent majority" that isn't accounted for in polling is the one which has determined that fewer people voting is the only way they can win.

[Edited on November 3, 2012 at 7:57 PM. Reason : ,]

11/3/2012 7:56:31 PM

Prep-e is really living in his own world

11/3/2012 8:05:47 PM

I posted a 538 link on facebook and some hillbilly I went to highschool with and am somehow related to posted this gem:

Quote :

"you've got to be one of the most ill-informed voters I know."

I went back to look at my recent posts and none of the political posts are speculation - all proven facts. The Reds are delusional as shit these days.

11/3/2012 9:04:18 PM

It's just desperation. The posibility of getting beat twice by a blah guy plus having to reexamine their status as being the majority in America is causing a lot of conservatives to have mini-meltdowns.

11/3/2012 9:11:20 PM

3 more days until the start of 1000 years of liberal darkness. My body is ready.

11/3/2012 9:29:34 PM

A large majority of the polls over-sample Democrats. The media is desperate to make this look like a close election when it's not. They're just trying to get more Democrats to show up at the polls by making Obama look like he has a chance. Romney is positively going to win. I don't care what Nate Silver's little program says, he's going to look like a clown after Tuesday. I will stay out of the soapbox for 1 full year if I'm wrong, you can hold me to it. That's my word.

11/4/2012 12:12:39 AM

keep telling yourself that, champ

11/4/2012 12:18:39 AM

I will, for 3 more days until I'm proved right.

11/4/2012 12:33:31 AM

Just saw this on Foxnews.com

Quote :

"PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL RATING Approve 48% Disapprove 48% Undecided 5%"

There you go, 101%.

11/4/2012 12:46:09 AM

It's called rounding error: As an example, it could be that the Approval-Undecided-Disapproval ratings down to one decimal place are 47.7%-4.7%-47.6%, which would add up to 100% but round to 48%-5%-48%.

Similarly, if later on the figures become 47.4%-5.3%-47.3%, that would still add up to 100% but round to 47%-5%-47%, appearing to add up to only 99% in the reported totals.


It gets worse as you add categories of response, like if you polled people's preferences for the 6 Presidential candidates with majority-level ballot/write-in access, and also included "other" or "don't know" or refusal to answer, you can get cumulative round-off errors as great as 4% in either direction: 40.45-39.45-4.45-3.45-3.44-2.44-2.44-2.44-1.44 adds to 100 but rounds to 40-39-5-3-3-2-2-2-1, which adds to 96; meanwhile, 40.55-39.55-5.55-4.55-3.56-2.56-1.56-1.56-0.56 adds to 100 but rounds to 41-40-6-5-4-3-2-2-1, which adds to 104.



In general, if a population is divided into n pieces, and their portions are reported in percentages, and the number of decimal places used in reporting is great enough that the average piece won't be rounded to 0, the smallest total attributable to rounding error can be calculated by first looking at the largest ratio of integer to n that is less than 1/2 (errors like 50.5-49.5 becoming 51-50 can be fixed by rounding to odd to minimize reported ties and blowouts, giving 51-49, or by the scientific practice of rounding to even, giving 50-50), which is (n-1)/(2n) if n is odd, or (n-2)/(2n) if n is even; multiplying by 2 and seeing the symmetry of the situation for the largest such erroneous total gives the maximum error in terms of the value of the last reported decimal place as (n-1)/2 if n is odd, or n/2-1 if n is even.

As an example, if you're reporting on 999 different sub-populations, you need to report your sub-population figures down to three decimal places just to make sure that the sum of the reported figures will round to 100% (it will range from about 99.502% to about 100.498%, which all round to 100%); generally you need to report sub-population figures to ceil(log((n-1)/2)) decimal places to assure that the sum will round to 100%.

11/4/2012 1:00:03 AM

did you seriously just post that?

11/4/2012 1:07:27 AM

i now have two bets with hardcore conservatives that Obama will win. i know and see where they're coming from, because there will be a lot of "firsts" if Obama wins (mainly unemployment and approval rating factors point to a loss), but i just don't see it happening.

besides, i figure it's a win/win for me. if Obama wins, i get some $$ and a free lunch; if Romney wins, then we're rid of yet another horrible president and someone else gets a chance to turn around the last 12 years worth of incompetence.

11/4/2012 8:37:44 AM

More money spent in NC than in NV, NH, MN, WI, MI, PA, or IA according to this map.

11/4/2012 11:24:40 AM

So I'd just like to note that basically all the national polls have conformed to the state polling over the last couple days. Even Rasmussen is showing a tie when it had previously showed a lead for Romney. The PPP national tracker has +3 Obama, his largest lead in that particular poll, and is probably about what the final margin will be.

11/4/2012 11:55:37 AM

Quote :

" I will stay out of the soapbox for 1 full year if I'm wrong, you can hold me to it. "

I would rather that you continue to post everyday for a year instead if you're wrong so we can all laugh at you.

11/4/2012 11:56:30 AM

Wow, two things that are sad. Voter suppression may yet again be an issue. And mitts jeep add backfiring on him.

11/4/2012 12:05:49 PM

https://data.intrade.com/graphing/temp/chart135201787069535903.png

Obama is still strong, but it's far from settled.

http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventId=84326

Also interesting:

http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=754570

most likely scenario is
Senate - Democrats
House - Republicans
President - Obama

[Edited on November 4, 2012 at 12:17 PM. Reason : ]

11/4/2012 12:13:23 PM