U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-16-2012, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539

Advertisements

I became such a dork during the election season. Every morning I would check RCP on my phone before getting out of bed and even before checking e-mails. If I knew that Quinnipiac or someone was coming out with polls early in the morning, I would check their site first. Every day I would look forward to the Rasmussen poll coming out at 8:30 and the Gallup poll coming out at noon. If I was unable to check them immediately, I would wonder about them until I was able to.

Did anyone else really get in to polls? I have been fairly interested in politics for a long time, but never so interested in polls as I was this election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-16-2012, 05:11 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 1,714,185 times
Reputation: 1053
I was hardcore into checking polls. I still have RCP as one of my favored tabs. Although it's lately lost it's appeal, lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 05:22 PM
 
755 posts, read 612,783 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I became such a dork during the election season. Every morning I would check RCP on my phone before getting out of bed and even before checking e-mails. If I knew that Quinnipiac or someone was coming out with polls early in the morning, I would check their site first. Every day I would look forward to the Rasmussen poll coming out at 8:30 and the Gallup poll coming out at noon. If I was unable to check them immediately, I would wonder about them until I was able to.

Did anyone else really get in to polls? I have been fairly interested in politics for a long time, but never so interested in polls as I was this election.
Life is so much easier now, isn't it?

Fewer polls, and you've learned that you don't really need to 'unskew' them.

At least, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've learned that...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 05:37 PM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
6,539 posts, read 4,163,393 times
Reputation: 2571
No, and if I ever get to be a fanatic about looking at polls will some forum member please promise to shoot me
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 06:55 PM
 
Location: Limbo
6,459 posts, read 5,919,952 times
Reputation: 6228
It sure is different now. In a few months, things will be back to normal, though.

Election season is always around the corner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 07:21 PM
 
Location: Sonoran Desert
27,963 posts, read 37,950,043 times
Reputation: 17479
Me too, especially toward the end. I became a 538 addict, too, checking frequently for every update that was put on that site. LOL.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
Life is so much easier now, isn't it?

Fewer polls, and you've learned that you don't really need to 'unskew' them.

At least, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've learned that...
I wasn't "unskewing" polls. BTW - did you not question the polls in October when they had Romney up?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
I was hardcore into checking polls. I still have RCP as one of my favored tabs. Although it's lately lost it's appeal, lol
Oh I went further - I downloaded the RCP app for my Iphone. Now I find myself starting to check it only to realize there's no point...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 08:25 PM
 
755 posts, read 612,783 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I wasn't "unskewing" polls. BTW - did you not question the polls in October when they had Romney up?
The polls never had Romney up. Never.

We elect our Presidents in this country using a thing called the Electoral College. Perhaps you've heard of this? In any case, Mitt Romney never -- not once -- led in the polling aggregates of enough states to give him the 270 Electoral College votes necessary to win. His highpoint was 261. See for yourself:
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - State Changes

Furthermore, I was actually aware of the relevant history. I was aware first debates are traditionally won by the challenger, who traditionally gets a bounce, which traditionally fades.

And that's what happened.

The polls predicted the winner and historical precedent proved accurate.

Game.
Set.
Match.

Don't assume that, just because you ignore the evidence when you don't like where it leads, I do the same. I don't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2012, 08:45 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,969 posts, read 13,783,008 times
Reputation: 4539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
The polls never had Romney up. Never.
Yes, last time I checked, they did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
We elect our Presidents in this country using a thing called the Electoral College. Perhaps you've heard of this? In any case, Mitt Romney never -- not once -- led in the polling aggregates of enough states to give him the 270 Electoral College votes necessary to win. His highpoint was 261. See for yourself:
RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - State Changes

Furthermore, I was actually aware of the relevant history. I was aware first debates are traditionally won by the challenger, who traditionally gets a bounce, which traditionally fades.

And that's what happened.
Not exactly.... That may be what happened, but the bounce doesn't typically fade as much as it did. It's more of a bump. See the election that is most compared to this one - 2004. Kerry went from being down by 7 or so to down by 1.5 at the height of his bump. Eventually he lost by about 2.5.

If you want to actually have a discussion, do not insult me. Your guy won...there's no need to be smug and continue to gloat. This thread was supposed to be a lighthearted thread that was supposed to be something that we - on both sides - could laugh at.

As far as the electoral college, there has been exactly one time in anywhere near recent history where one candidate has won the popular vote and one has won the electoral college - and it wasn't in an election won by one candidate nationally by anywhere near 1.5 (which is about where Romney got to). In the one state that was keeping Romney from being up when he was up in the national polls (Ohio), Romney actually did better than the national average. This is the one state where I thought the skewed polls crowd had a point (though I was not "unskewing" the OH polls), and I think it had to do with early voting messing up the polls there. Undecideds seemed to go for Obama nationally and in most swing states other than in Ohio where they supposedly went for Romney if you believe the polls, but that makes no sense. Ohio is not some alternate universe where things happen differently from the way they happen in every other state.

Regardless, the polls were very close in Ohio at that point (as well as in the states like VA, CO, and NH where Romney had a slight lead). Even with multiple polls reducing the MOE, one could have easily called these states all tossups at that point.

So, yes, it is fair to say Romney was up (given that he was up in the national polls) or that the election was a tossup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
The polls predicted the winner and historical precedent proved accurate.
Actually, I wouldn't say so. There's really not a lot of precedence for the undecideds breaking for the incumbent, but anyway...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mictlantecuhtli View Post
Game.
Set.
Match.

Don't assume that, just because you ignore the evidence when you don't like where it leads, I do the same. I don't.
No, that's not true. What you did is spin what I said in to something entirely different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top