Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!
Someone had to make it. Hopefully this thread will help reduce election crap in the rest of NSG.
This is the place to post election news, opinions, argue with people, ect.
I will try to post news articles and such, and try to remain non-partisan.
So answer me this, NS: Romney-Ryan or Obama Biden?
Liberal hypocrisy at its finest right there folks, you say not to judge people based on their looks (That's not a liberal phenomenon, just stating that the democrats brand themselves as the "Acceptance Party"), but then you say that you don't like someone because he looks like a crook, WTF?
You know, I never really noticed Romney's entrance at the convention.
By the way, folks, this election is basically over. Obama currently sits at an 81.9% chance of winning with a 45 electoral vote cushion.
It's not a poll. It's Nate Silver's sabremetrics. It's not biased, it's a model - it's math. And I'm actually better off if Romney wins. You can read it on fivethirtyeightblog.
The difference between polls and chance of victory is that it doesn't matter if Romney blows Obama out in Montana, if he loses Ohio he has almost no chance of winning this thing. If he loses Florida his chances are like 2%.
Rasmussen has a national tracking poll, Gallup has Obama up something like 6, neither matters. Swing states matter. No one actually thinks Romney is winning or even close to winning right now, including republican strategists (though campaign officials have to put on a good show for the camera). The best you can say is that he still has time to make a comeback if he wins some debates.
Now, it's Republicans making the case their voters are undersampled.
Schwartz, whose institute conducts polls in battleground states for CBS News and The New York Times, asserts that pollsters who weight according to party identification could miss the sorts of important shifts in the electorate that could be determinative.
"A good example for why pollsters shouldn't weight by party ID is if you look at the 2008 presidential election and compared it to the 2004 presidential election, there was a 7-point change in the party ID gap," Schwartz said. Democrats and Republicans represented equal portions of the 2004 electorate, according to exit polls. But, in 2008, the percentage of the electorate identifying as Democrats increased by 2 percentage points, to 39 percent, while Republicans dropped 5 points, to 32 percent.
Asked specifically about GOP complaints regarding the party-ID composition of public surveys, Schwartz said: "They're the ones trailing in our swing-state polls."
"There are more people who want to identify with the Democratic Party right now than the Republican Party," he added.
"
Hewitt is altering the polls based not on the science of sampling, but on his own personal views.
Don't like the polls? Accept that your campaign is not doing a good job? Nahhhh, say they're wrong.
In less than 50days we will have the real answer.
