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.
I know there are some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Well, there's NO guarentee that they will be RIGHT.
I think it's LIKELY but it's not a CERTAINTY.
That's not my argument. My argument is that the REASON you folks think the polls will be wrong is BOGUS (ie that ALL THOSE POLLS are somehow deliberately slanting towards Obama). That just plain dumb.
IF the polls turn out to be wrong - it will probably be because they underestimated the size of the turnout by GOP voters. That's the same issue they had with the Walker recall. Turnout is much harder to predict than preference - and turnout this time around sounds like it will be HUGE (how huge we just don't know).
I STILL think Obama will win - but we won't know until tomorrow (hopefully).
Ken
But how (and why) can they underestimate the GOP turnout? It is obvious there will be a greater GOP turnout than Democrat. (See my original post)
Cell phone use skews towards Obama supporters, genius!
How could problems reaching cell phone users cause a disproportionate number of respondents being Obama supporters? Man, you guys will say anything -- anything at all, no matter how nonsensical -- to hold out hope for Romney!
Aside from that bit of insane nonsense, you obviously aren't even familiar enough with Rasmussen to know that they don't even call cell phone users.
So Obama did not expand the war in Afghanistan? And don't tell me he ended the war in Iraq. It was a done deal by Bush in Nov. 2008.
if the wars are over, why are we still funding them?
War Costs To Date (costofwar.com)
•Total War Funding: $1.38 trillion has been allocated to date to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $121.1 billion in fiscal year 2012.
•Iraq: To date, $807.4 billion has been allocated for the war in Iraq since 2003, including $10.1 billion in fiscal year 2012.
•Afghanistan: To date, $570.9 billion has been allocated for the war in Afghanistan since 2001, including $111.1 billion in fiscal year 2012.
americans are smarter than our leaders think we are.
It should be interesting to see how accurate or inaccurate the polls are this go around. The polls are in the business of predicting the outcome. PPP and Rasmussen have been the most accurate recently despite being labeled "that Democrat poll" and "that Republican poll" respectively. Every poll wants to be able to point to their own product and tout their own accuracy. They're likely to miss by a large margin this election because the dynamics are so different from 2008. We'll see what happens later today.
My prediction: We won't know who won until at least a week from now.
No, I don't support "one world government".....actually I don't really care about "one world government," only the Tinfoil Party care about that.
HAPPY ELECTION DAY!
You don't even know WHAT you believe or don't believe in! You obviously don't believe in U.S. sovereignty or the Constitution as the law of the land.
Also, I don't take any issue with what the UN does because it acts on the calls of many nations, not just one, and we are apart [sic] of the UN. We did not attack Libya in the name of the USA, we did it under UN orders and provided the manpower to help them. Much like many other nations do for the UN.
No U.S. President should ever circumvent Congress and our Constitution and use U.S. military might "under UN orders". You are obviously one of the brainwashed who think the UN is all kumbaya, peace, love and make the world a better place. It's a dang shame that the UN didn't fall into the East River during hurricane Sandy!
But how (and why) can they underestimate the GOP turnout? It is obvious there will be a greater GOP turnout than Democrat. (See my original post)
Not necessarily. By all accounts turnout has been HUGE - and not JUST in RED states. New voter registration here in "True Blue" Washington for example, has been record-breaking - so clearly it's not JUST RED voters who are turning in gigantic numbers - and as a general rule Red voters tend to vote more reliably than Blue voters do. This has meant that when the turnout is small the GOP generally wins (because they are most likely the more-reliable GOP voters) but when the turnout is large it's usually because the Democrats are turning out in large numbers.
So, in historical terms a HUGE turnout does not generally bode well for the GOP - and that's what we're seeng this time around.
Will this time be DIFFERENT for the GOP?
Possibly - but when you combine that huge turn out with Obama having the edge in the polls, that's not such a good thing for the GOP.
250,000 fewer Democrats early voting in Ohio than 4 years ago.
Bush beat Kerry by 118,000 in Ohio
Romney will take Ohio
The Jets won their 2nd away game.
Republicans will take the White House.
ROMNEY/RYAN!
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.
... I wonder if they two are related? 
