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.
Exactly. Romney could be close or even have a little bit more in terms of the aggregate popular vote - but unless he gess 270 electoral votes (and it's a winner take all system) - he loses. That's why the popular vote polls don't mean much unless one looks at the state-by-state polls. And the fact were that Obama started out with a bigger EC vote base than Romney - Romney would have to flip a lot of battleground states, run the table in order to win the election, and that didn't happen. When Ohio went into the Obama column, that was it (which accounted for Rove's disbelief on national TV).
Except that the popular vote is made up of the aggregate totals of states which determines the electoral college. It is basically impossible realistically speaking to lose the popular vote by more then 1-2% points and win the electoral college. It has never happened ever because it is basically impossible since voter turnout is always going to be between around 45-80% in each state with most in the 45-65% range and most states with larger populations are never going to come close to a 70-30 blowout unless it is an uncompetative election. As such blips in turnout in individual states aren't going to move the % by all that much. 2000 had a popular vote electoral college split but the electoral vote was 267-271 and the popular vote was a .5% margin. The same was true with Tildon-Hayes (and that had fraud)
Thus in a reasonably contested election the popular vote cannot differ from the electoral vote winner by more then 1-2 points. It never has in the past and it never will
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert
Look again at your own first link then look at the box that says "likely voters" with the graph then use the tool to highlight the month of October, you will see about a 6 point lead from Oct. 11-Oct. 28. RCP only links to the one last "oh crap poll" where gallop did a 4 point U turn. If you read gallop they have the whole polling history where Romney is up by about 6 all through October.
Then look at every election in US history. Aberrations like absurdly high turnout in non competative states don't happen. I also doubt that an extra 20% turnout even in California with a 60-40 split would move the country more then a fraction of a %. Never ever in history has what you described ever happened especially considering even the most uncontested states with any real population are around 55-60% and some of the states you mention like Pennsylvania aren't even that. For the winner this means you are only netting around maybe 10%-20% of any extra turnout in the margin and that 10%-20% is a fraction of the total state excess vote which itself likely a fraction of 1% of the total vote so no.
As to Al Gore he only won the popular vote by .5% hardly close to 2 percent. However if you want an example of why what you are saying on a popular vote electoral vote split is impossible beyond about 2% the best election to look to is 1888. In that election the south was segregated and most Republicans (African Americans) couldn't vote. As such some southern state went to Cleveland by insane margins....Thus parts of south was basically voting one party and that split was about still 2%>
ugh, You are right about the 6 points, my mistake, but you are changing your argument because your point was that they were predicting a romney win and that just isnt true.
in State by state polling,Romney was still losing, Gallup was perticting high turnout in Republican leaning states and that is why he was up by so much. There was literally no point in the election where romney lead state polling/the electoral college. (RCP's graph that i liked does not include swing state). The closest it ever got was by like the second week in October when Romney lead in Virginia and Florida,but Barack Obama was still ahead in New Hampshire, Ohio, Nevada, and Colorado.
And again, your argument about impossible is completely wrong. that is an absolute and implies that the argument i put forth could not happen in any circumstance and that just inst true. The scenario I put forth is unlikely, but it is possible.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert
Except that the popular vote is made up of the aggregate totals of states which determines the electoral college. It is basically impossible realistically speaking to lose the popular vote by more then 1-2% points and win the electoral college. It has never happened ever because it is basically impossible since voter turnout is always going to be between around 45-80% in each state with most in the 45-65% range and most states with larger populations are never going to come close to a 70-30 blowout unless it is an uncompetative election. As such blips in turnout in individual states aren't going to move the % by all that much. 2000 had a popular vote electoral college split but the electoral vote was 267-271 and the popular vote was a .5% margin. The same was true with Tildon-Hayes (and that had fraud)
Thus in a reasonably contested election the popular vote cannot differ from the electoral vote winner by more then 1-2 points. It never has in the past and it never will
just because something has not happened does not mean it is "basically impossible". I understand you really want to be right, but you are using an absolute and it makes you dead wrong. again the term you are looking for is unlikely.
Way to early to predict what will happen in Nov but it is getting closer to seeing polls that might have some validity. As for here in AR, most experts think Prior is in trouble. This doesn't mean he will lose, but he is not a show in, like in the past. I think most people, who keep an open mind and don't just look for polls that lean their way or read only one side, will admit the Republicans will pick up a few seats in the Senate or they certainly should. I am not sure it will be enough for them to take over.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 22 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,539,320 times
Reputation: 6033
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
Way to early to predict what will happen in Nov but it is getting closer to seeing polls that might have some validity. As for here in AR, most experts think Prior is in trouble. This doesn't mean he will lose, but he is not a show in, like in the past. I think most people, who keep an open mind and don't just look for polls that lean their way or read only one side, will admit the Republicans will pick up a few seats in the Senate or they certainly should. I am not sure it will be enough for them to take over.
Why would you believe that? im not asking why you believe republicans would pick up seats, im asking why you believe someone cannot be critical and think they(Republicans) will not pick up any seats.
This is not 2012 where Barack Obama was leading in all but 2 swing states 4 days before the election and republicans still thought Mitt Romney had a chance.
This is 10 months out and we dont even have finalized candidates yet. Most of these races,even without finalized candidates are only 1 and 2 points apart, even Mitch McConnell's.
It is early, but then again it is just over nine months from today; it will go by fast and be here before we know it. Still too soon to tell if it's a boy or girl, however.
From what I've read, masses of people are going to get booted from employer-based health plans through out late summer and early fall. A bunch of Senate Dem candidates are on video parroting the dreaded "if you like your plan, you can keep it." The GOP campaign ads write themselves. Expect truckloads of bumper stickers that say "If you don't like your senator, you can vote him/her out..."
Either way, I'm not sure how much difference it makes. D's will certainly keep the WH, and R's will almost certainly keep the House. You need 60 votes to really control the Senate, and neither side will have that.
just because something has not happened does not mean it is "basically impossible". I understand you really want to be right, but you are using an absolute and it makes you dead wrong. again the term you are looking for is unlikely.
but yes, it is possible and I explained how.
Is it theoretically possible, yes it is theoritically possible to win the electoral college with 0 popular votes or close to zero because of the way the system is set up. With that said It is basically impossibly the way things actually are to win the popular vote by more then 2% of the vote and lose the electoral college. It didn't even happen when you had multiple states voting in the 70-80%+ range for one candidate. Basically to get a 6% advantage those votes are going to be fairly evenly distributed across America, there is just no way it can come from a few states since in an election 2012's size 6% is basically just shy of 8 million votes, or to put it another way pretty much everyone who voted for Obama in California, and once more a lot of the excess votes are skewed towards swing states since that is where the GOTV machines are the best and those votes are usually split down the middle. The fact is the further you get from a tie the closer to 0 the chance of winning the electoral college and losing the popular vote and in a US election a 6% advantage is basically saying the person will win the electoral college. 2008 was practically a landslide and that was 7%.
I don't think you are conceptualizing how major a 6% advantage is in the popular vote is and what it means in the state by state.
Last edited by Egbert; 01-29-2014 at 01:34 PM..
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.
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.
