Topic: Presidential Election predictions (Read 4809 times)

Dannyboy · « **Reply #20 on:** November 04, 2008, 08:38:03 PM »

Quote from: cimics on November 04, 2008, 08:25:31 PM

At the rate things are going, the 300+ predictors for Obama are going to win out.

Yay! i was just being optimistic, it'd be nice if it came true.

COME ON!

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #21 on:** November 04, 2008, 08:47:01 PM »

running commentary and I missed it!

I can't see Michigan ever coming along.

Has anyone noticed the popular vote count?

right now, out of some 30,000,000 votes cast, there is an obama advantage of just 200,000.

OBAMA: 17,236,769
MCCAIN: 17,022,115

This could make for interesting analysis if the vote comes in very close, even with a massive electoral victory for Obama.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #22 on:** November 04, 2008, 08:49:07 PM »

DB, I wouldn't get too happy about an Obama/Dem victory. It may mean no meddling (as you perceive it) in international relations but.... well... it has a good chance of meaning no 'meddling' when you want it, either.

Dannyboy · « **Reply #23 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:00:12 PM »

Quote from: sntjohnny on November 04, 2008, 08:49:07 PM

DB, I wouldn't get too happy about an Obama/Dem victory. It may mean no meddling (as you perceive it) in international relations but.... well... it has a good chance of meaning no 'meddling' when you want it, either.

i am prepared to be disappointed (always a big possibility with politicians - y'know the old saying, "Never trust anything a man says when he is a] drunk, b] in love, or c] running for elected office"), but i am happy. Either McCain or Obama would be a welcome change from the Bush catastrophe, but honestly, the right-wing christian base in the US deeply disturbs me (present company excepted) and i did not like the way that McCain has pandered to them through his recent campaign. The further millenialist end-times-believing fundamentalist christians are from any capacity to deploy nuclear weapons, the happier i am.

Also, did you notice how badly calling her opponent 'godless' backfired on Elizabeth Dole? Heheh

cimics · « **Reply #24 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:00:56 PM »

Obama has passed McCain in Va

End Bringer · « **Reply #25 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:08:45 PM »

Quote from: sntjohnny on November 04, 2008, 08:47:01 PM

running commentary and I missed it!

I can't see Michigan ever coming along.

Has anyone noticed the popular vote count?

right now, out of some 30,000,000 votes cast, there is an obama advantage of just 200,000.

OBAMA: 17,236,769
MCCAIN: 17,022,115

This could make for interesting analysis if the vote comes in very close, even with a massive electoral victory for Obama.

Yes, there's nothing sadder for a democracy when the most important decision for the country is not even truly in the hands of the people. Not that I expect much outrage from Democrats if the popular goes to McCain while the electoral goes to Obama.

Quote

Either McCain or Obama would be a welcome change from the Bush catastrophe, but honestly, the right-wing christian base in the US deeply disturbs me (present company excepted) and i did not like the way that McCain has pandered to them through his recent campaign. The further millenialist end-times-believing fundamentalist christians are from any capacity to deploy nuclear weapons, the happier i am.

Yes, choosing between a group who you think could be responsible for the death of millions of lives, while compared to a group who is already on record for supporting the death of millions of lives. How can anyone question your rationality for supporting the latter.

cimics · « **Reply #26 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:15:06 PM »

Gore won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the election. It's all about distribution. Were the Republicans moaning when Bush won? I don't think so. That said, I agree that an electoral-popular vote split would be bad, it was bad with Bush-Gore and would be bad here. If people knew the popular vote would make a difference, would voting behavior be different? Perhaps more people would vote in "safe" states because their vote could still affect the election, but I don't know for sure, or which side would benefit.

cimics · « **Reply #27 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:17:56 PM »

Obama has a sizeable lead in Mich.

Looks like Obama is going to win all 4 electoral votes in Maine. So much for my scenario of Maine being a playmaker.

Question now, will Obama steal an electoral vote in Nebraska?

End Bringer · « **Reply #28 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:21:16 PM »

Quote from: cimics on November 04, 2008, 09:15:06 PM

Gore won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the election. It's all about distribution. Were the Republicans moaning when Bush won? I don't think so. That said, I agree that an electoral-popular vote split would be bad, it was bad with Bush-Gore and would be bad here. If people knew the popular vote would make a difference, would voting behavior be different? Perhaps more people would vote in "safe" states because their vote could still affect the election, but I don't know for sure, or which side would benefit.

Oh I'm not saying Republicans aren't guilty of the same behavior. It just goes to show no one's concerned that there exists a serious flaw in our process as long as their favored candidate wins, even due to that flaw.

Dannyboy · « **Reply #29 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:21:55 PM »

Yes, choosing between a group who you think could be responsible for the death of millions of lives, while compared to a group who is already on record for supporting the death of millions of lives. How can anyone question your rationality for supporting the latter.

Depends on your assumptions. With your (on record) assumptions about the personhood of embryos from conception then it is completely understandable that you become a single issue voter in this election, like SntJohnny has said he is. My assumptions are different, and since i understand that, i do not question your rationality for your choices in this matter.

As cimics says, any republican complaints about the electoral and popular vote not matching up would be pretty ironic after 2000.

cimics · « **Reply #30 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:25:01 PM »

I'm trying to remember . . . was Iowa a tossup state? Looks to be Obama's now.

McCain is getting crushed in Colorado, losing ground in Va, but has just pulled ahead in NC

cimics · « **Reply #31 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:30:24 PM »

McCain is comfortably ahead in Az. I couldn't believe the media reports that it was a toss-up state. But it's early, and look what's happening in Va. Still, I don't think Obama is going to come close to beating McCain in his home state.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #32 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:36:22 PM »

Iowa was not a toss-up.

I think the argument would be that if the popular vote goes differently than the electoral twice in 10 years it is time to re-think things.

As far as the 2000 election goes, this would tie in with the 2004... the popular vote could very well be influenced by all these media outlets 'calling' states based on exit polling and junk and getting it exactly wrong. In 2000, they called Florida while a huge republican voting area was still voting and a lot of Republicans simply didn't go. Add those in and the others around the country who had been told that Gore or Kerry had won and stayed home and the popular vote may have been entirely different.

I think it is time to re-think the electoral college anyway. I still think it is a good idea but not at the state level. The county level is the way to go. This would resolve a whole lot of issues and improve the fairness of the whole system.

Quote

Also, did you notice how badly calling her opponent 'godless' backfired on Elizabeth Dole? Heheh

I did, but she did it wrong. It was a legitimate point to make but should have been made differently.

cimics · « **Reply #33 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:37:01 PM »

Quote

Oh I'm not saying Republicans aren't guilty of the same behavior. It just goes to show no one's concerned that there exists a serious flaw in our process as long as their favored candidate wins, even due to that flaw.

BTW, I remember reading awhile back that some states have passed or were considering a popular vote rule that says all the state's electoral votes will go to the national popular vote winner if enough states enact such a rule as to create an electoral majority.

Dannyboy · « **Reply #34 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:37:10 PM »

Quote from: cimics on November 04, 2008, 09:30:24 PM

McCain is comfortably ahead in Az. I couldn't believe the media reports that it was a toss-up state. But it's early, and look what's happening in Va. Still, I don't think Obama is going to come close to beating McCain in his home state.

That's interesting. The BBC has 54.9% Obama vs 43.9% McCain in Arizona.

cimics · « **Reply #35 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:39:14 PM »

Mo tightening up

cimics · « **Reply #36 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:41:47 PM »

Quote

That's interesting. The BBC has 54.9% Obama vs 43.9% McCain in Arizona.

What percentage of precincts reporting? 13 percent on ABC news

Dannyboy · « **Reply #37 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:42:23 PM »

The BBC also have just had John Bolton on as a guest speaker, and MAN he's an annoying pompous walrus-looking social inadequate.

i suppose that's off-topic, but please remember that it's 03.40am here. And there was wine.

End Bringer · « **Reply #38 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:43:46 PM »

Quote from: Dannyboy on November 04, 2008, 09:21:55 PM

Yes, choosing between a group who you think could be responsible for the death of millions of lives, while compared to a group who is already on record for supporting the death of millions of lives. How can anyone question your rationality for supporting the latter.

Depends on your assumptions. With your (on record) assumptions....

And thus why you fail as it can't be an assumption if I have arguements and evidence to back it up, as compared to your arbitrary reasoning.

Quote

My assumptions are different, and since i understand that, i do not question your rationality for your choices in this matter.

Hehe. It's the fact that you think such an issue comes down to 'assumption' that's cause for concern.

Quote

As cimics says, any republican complaints about the electoral and popular vote not matching up would be pretty ironic after 2000.

Indeed, or Democrats being fine with it at this point after all the previous fuss. If Obama wins both I can at least say that yes, he truly was the majority's choice. The majority are idiots, but that's why I hold democracy to be a poor form of government anyway.

Dannyboy · « **Reply #39 on:** November 04, 2008, 09:44:08 PM »

Quote

What percentage of precincts reporting? 13 percent on ABC news

Didn't say. That could well account for the disparity

Author Topic: Presidential Election predictions (Read 4809 times)