Romney ain't winning

[Necrosis]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

91% based on Monday's national polls that Obama wins.


hey MCWAY, how are those facts for ya?

[240 is Back]

Fitting for a tight election, voters in tiny Dixville Notch, N.H., split over the candidates, Obama and Romney receiving five votes each when balloting took place at midnight. In nearby Hart's Location, the hamlet that shares the honor of casting the nation's first presidential ballots, Obama won with 23 votes, Romney received nine and Libertarian Gary Johnson received one.


This is a little troubling.

[dario73]

Romney might lose.

A lot of people don't have the fortitude to admit they were wrong in voting for the empty suit in 2008.

[headhuntersix]

Or he might win.....I can't wait until this shit is over.

[garebear]

Romney might lose.

A lot of people don't have the fortitude to admit they were wrong in voting for the empty suit in 2008.

Does your post even make sense to you?

[MCWAY]

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

91% based on Monday's national polls that Obama wins.


hey MCWAY, how are those facts for ya?

You mean national polls like those of CNN, that oversampled Dems by 11. Or PPP that has them oversampled by 9?

On the other hand, look at Gallup. The final tally: Romney 50%; Obama 49% (final allocation estimate, with undecideds removed). Every challenger that has been 50% or higher has won. That's 100%

Heck, even the "Redskin Rule" is at 94%, higher than your little 538 blogs.

Then, there's the early voting FACTS, from which you ran away last time. Obama isn't doing nearly as well as 2008; Romney's right behind him in Ohio and Florida and beating him in Colorado. If the GOP turnout is high, Romney wins it.

[Soul Crusher]

I'm hearing the early voting numbers for obama SUCK and even cook political report and silver backtracking based on their flawed turnout models. 

[The True Adonis]

You mean national polls like those of CNN, that oversampled Dems by 11. Or PPP that has them oversampled by 9?

On the other hand, look at Gallup. The final tally: Romney 50%; Obama 49% (final allocation estimate, with undecideds removed). Every challenger that has been 50% or higher has won. That's 100%

Heck, even the "Redskin Rule" is at 94%, higher than your little 538 blogs.

Then, there's the early voting FACTS, from which you ran away last time. Obama isn't doing nearly as well as 2008; Romney's right behind him in Ohio and Florida and beating him in Colorado. If the GOP turnout is high, Romney wins it.

[LurkerNoMore]

10 more hours before all the excuses over Romney losing start pouring out

[Soul Crusher]

Romney up 92K in OH early voting? Update: Gannett pulls link


posted at 9:21 am on November 6, 2012 by Ed Morrissey






Update: The data is still up at the Gannett site, but they’ve pulled the link from the front page.  Justin Higgins says that OH won’t release EV data separately:
 



Justin Higgins@JustinHiggins


@EdMorrissey Ohio doesn't report early results until the polls close.

 6 Nov 12 Reply
Retweet
Favorite
 


Original post follows, but if this turns out to be wrong, Gannett may have some explaining to do about why they put it up on their website’s front page.
 
======================
 
So says Gannett’s Cincinnati.com, which has the data from the state government posted at its site this morning. I put the question mark on the data because I don’t see anything up yet at the Ohio Secretary of State’s website, but occasionally the media will get updates prior to the website. According to the data, Mitt Romney already has 697,143 votes before the polls opened a couple of hours ago, while Barack Obama only has 605,546, a difference of almost 92,000 votes.  The data is time-stamped at 2:03 ET this morning, and the link on the front page of the site reads, “Early voters: How Ohio has voted.”
 
A few counties have not yet reported any early-voting results, but one county in particular looks huge.  Cuyahoga, which includes Cleveland, should be a Democratic stronghold, and perhaps the one area where Democratic early-voting efforts should have produced their biggest lead.  Instead, Romney has a lead of about 14,000 votes already, 127,570 to 113,373.  In Hamilton County, where Cincinnati itself is located, Romney leads by over 5,000, 29,969 to 24,808.  A quick scan of the data shows Romney leading in every county with more than 25,000 EVs.
 
This may be a very big deal, if these numbers are correct.  Obama had a big lead in EVs before Election Day in 2008, which allowed him to withstand the GOP’s better turnout on the day itself.  Frankly, Team Romney might have been thrilled to be trailing by 92K at this juncture.  To be ahead in early voting portends a big Republican turnout in the Buckeye State, and perhaps an early night for all of us.  We’ll see, but this is the first indication of unforeseen Romney strength in this election.

[MCWAY]

Laugh at THIS, Adonis:



A total of 1,010 adults were interviewed by telephone nationwide by live interviewers calling both landline and cell phones. All
respondents were asked questions concerning basic demographics, and the entire sample was weighted to reflect national Census
figures for gender, race, age, education, region of country, telephone usage and whether respondents own or rent their homes.
Registered voters were asked questions about their likelihood of voting, past voting behavior, and interest in the campaign; based
on answers to those questions, 693 respondents were classified as likely voters.

Respondents who reported that they had already cast an absentee ballot or voted early were automatically classified as likely voters. Among those likely voters, 41% described themselves as Democrats, 29% described themselves as Independents, and 30% described themselves as Republicans.

Crosstabs on the following pages only include results for subgroups with enough unweighted cases to produce a sampling error
of +/- 8.5 percentage points or less. Some subgroups represent too small a share of the national population to produce crosstabs
with an acceptable sampling error. Interviews were conducted among these subgroups, but results for groups with a sampling
error larger than +/-8.5 percentage points are not displayed and instead are denoted with "N/A".
POLL

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/11/04/top16.pdf

Not to mention THIS (early voting):

Colorado              

Votes: 1.6 million              

Democrats: 35 percent              

Republicans: 37 percent              

___              

Florida

Votes: 4.3 million              

Democrats: 43 percent              

Republicans: 40 percent      


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83176.html#ixzz2BSAti3gQ

And THIS:

[ Invalid YouTube link ]

This was as of last Thursday. As of (at least) late Sunday, in Ohio, Obama leads Romney in early voting by less than 85,000 votes, ABOUT A QUARTER OF THE MARGIN by which he lead McCain.

Actual numbers, not polls......This is the part where you and Necrosis run like scalded dogs and keep chirping about the NY Times 538 blogs mess.

[MCWAY]

Romney up 92K in OH early voting? Update: Gannett pulls link


posted at 9:21 am on November 6, 2012 by Ed Morrissey






Update: The data is still up at the Gannett site, but they’ve pulled the link from the front page.  Justin Higgins says that OH won’t release EV data separately:
 



Justin Higgins@JustinHiggins


@EdMorrissey Ohio doesn't report early results until the polls close.

 6 Nov 12 Reply
Retweet
Favorite
 


Original post follows, but if this turns out to be wrong, Gannett may have some explaining to do about why they put it up on their website’s front page.
 
======================
 
So says Gannett’s Cincinnati.com, which has the data from the state government posted at its site this morning. I put the question mark on the data because I don’t see anything up yet at the Ohio Secretary of State’s website, but occasionally the media will get updates prior to the website. According to the data, Mitt Romney already has 697,143 votes before the polls opened a couple of hours ago, while Barack Obama only has 605,546, a difference of almost 92,000 votes.  The data is time-stamped at 2:03 ET this morning, and the link on the front page of the site reads, “Early voters: How Ohio has voted.”
 
A few counties have not yet reported any early-voting results, but one county in particular looks huge.  Cuyahoga, which includes Cleveland, should be a Democratic stronghold, and perhaps the one area where Democratic early-voting efforts should have produced their biggest lead.  Instead, Romney has a lead of about 14,000 votes already, 127,570 to 113,373.  In Hamilton County, where Cincinnati itself is located, Romney leads by over 5,000, 29,969 to 24,808.  A quick scan of the data shows Romney leading in every county with more than 25,000 EVs.
 
This may be a very big deal, if these numbers are correct.  Obama had a big lead in EVs before Election Day in 2008, which allowed him to withstand the GOP’s better turnout on the day itself.  Frankly, Team Romney might have been thrilled to be trailing by 92K at this juncture.  To be ahead in early voting portends a big Republican turnout in the Buckeye State, and perhaps an early night for all of us.  We’ll see, but this is the first indication of unforeseen Romney strength in this election.

If that's the case, your numbers than the one I posted just a few minutes ago.

Obama behind or barely leading at this point. With high GOP turnout, Romney takes Ohio.

[Necrosis]

You mean national polls like those of CNN, that oversampled Dems by 11. Or PPP that has them oversampled by 9?

On the other hand, look at Gallup. The final tally: Romney 50%; Obama 49% (final allocation estimate, with undecideds removed). Every challenger that has been 50% or higher has won. That's 100%

Heck, even the "Redskin Rule" is at 94%, higher than your little 538 blogs.

Then, there's the early voting FACTS, from which you ran away last time. Obama isn't doing nearly as well as 2008; Romney's right behind him in Ohio and Florida and beating him in Colorado. If the GOP turnout is high, Romney wins it.

those FACTS you claim mean nothing in the end if they don't correlate into a win. So what if early voting is down, does it translate into a loss? it appears no, the only two polls showing Romney ahead are Gallup and the shitty Ras. The raw data doesn't lie Romney needs far to many swing states and is fading by all accounts.

are you serious about this redskin rule thing? I sure hope not.

[Soul Crusher]

those FACTS you claim mean nothing in the end if they don't correlate into a win. So what if early voting is down, does it translate into a loss? it appears no, the only two polls showing Romney ahead are Gallup and the shitty Ras. The raw data doesn't lie Romney needs far to many swing states and is fading by all accounts.

are you serious about this redskin rule thing? I sure hope not.

Every single election on Nov 6 in history has GOP winning presidency . 

[The True Adonis]

Every single election on Nov 6 in history has GOP winning presidency . 

That means nothing.  Superstition has no effect on anything in the world. 

[MCWAY]

those FACTS you claim mean nothing in the end if they don't correlate into a win. So what if early voting is down, does it translate into a loss? it appears no, the only two polls showing Romney ahead are Gallup and the shitty Ras. The raw data doesn't lie Romney needs far to many swing states and is fading by all accounts.

are you serious about this redskin rule thing? I sure hope not.

Redskin Rule - 94%; 538 blogs, based on ridiculously Dem-oversampled polls (an example of which I just posted) - 91%.  

The GOP had a BIGGER turnout on election day than the Dems did in 2008, particularly in Ohio. But, Obama has such a massive lead (340K) in early voting that McCain couldn't catch him.

That lead is GONE. Obama is (by the numbers I posted) only up by about 84,000. If Romney simply MATCHES McCain's turnout, he beats Obama in Ohio.

All Romney needs is the Southeast, Colorado, and Ohio; and it's all over. Romney hits 275 EC votes.

Keep thinking the Dems are going to be +9 or +11 today, like some of those polls.

[MCWAY]

That means nothing.  Superstition has no effect on anything in the world. 

Actual numbers DO. Funny how when I actually post RAW NUMBERS of ACTUAL VOTES, you and Necrosis tuck your tails and run.

[The True Adonis]

Actual numbers DO. Funny how when I actually post RAW NUMBERS of ACTUAL VOTES, you and Necrosis tuck your tails and run.

Thats precisely because you only post bullshit.  You will have your answer in a few hours and you will look like a fool.

I am sure you will try to weasel out of looking like a fool somehow and it will be highly interesting to see how you do it.

At least 333366 and some of the others are beginning to realize (although they should have realized earlier if they paid attention to the data) that Romney will not win. 

[Soul Crusher]

Thats precisely because you only post bullshit.  You will have your answer in a few hours and you will look like a fool.

I am sure you will try to weasel out of looking like a fool somehow and it will be highly interesting to see how you do it.

At least 333366 and some of the others are beginning to realize (although they should have realized earlier if they paid attention to the data) that Romney will not win. 

False - I think its 50-50 right now. 

[MCWAY]

Thats precisely because you only post bullshit.  You will have your answer in a few hours and you will look like a fool.



I am sure you will try to weasel out of looking like a fool somehow and it will be highly interesting to see how you do it.

At least 333366 and some of the others are beginning to realize (although they should have realized earlier if they paid attention to the data) that Romney will not win. 

Really!! Then refute those early voting numbers, Adonis.

All you have to do is post the actual voting numbers that support the polls, about which you keep chirping.

So, let's see it.

Show that the Dems are going to have a +9 or +11 edge on the GOP today.

Or are you (and Necrosis) going to continue to run and hide.

[Necrosis]

Really!! Then refute those early voting numbers, Adonis.

All you have to do is post the actual voting numbers that support the polls, about which you keep chirping.

So, let's see it.

Show that the Dems are going to have a +9 or +11 edge on the GOP today.

Or are you (and Necrosis) going to continue to run and hide.

run and hide from what you using a coincidence that has so many extraneous variables it might as well be a lottery ball bouncing around or the fact that while he is ahead you are banking on data that isn't available to scrutinize? which one.

What about the fact that he is behind in the vast majority of major polls, behind in the EC and fading? I won't try and show anything you request because you seem to be unaware of proving the negative is and use red herrings like you are a fisherman.

[MCWAY]

run and hide from what you using a coincidence that has so many extraneous variables it might as well be a lottery ball bouncing around or the fact that while he is ahead you are banking on data that isn't available to scrutinize? which one.

Data that isn't available? HELLOOOOOOO!!! The early voting numbers are in. Obama is down, WAAAAY DOWN, just as predicted.

What are these so called "extraneous variables" that cut Obama early voting numbers in Ohio by nearly 75% (that is, besides his sorry record) again?

 

What about the fact that he is behind in the vast majority of major polls, behind in the EC and fading? I won't try and show anything you request because you seem to be unaware of proving the negative is and use red herrings like you are a fisherman.

What part of "OVERSAMPLING DEMOCRATS" don't you understand? PPP polls (+9); CNN poll (+11), posted RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Not to mention the minor fact that in many of these precious polls of yours, Obama is in the mid-40s%. In most of them, it's tied. Incumbent presidents in the mid-40s tend to get beat.

Then, there's the poll you DON'T want to cite, namely Gallup, which had Romney at 50%. Considering that every challenger that's been at 50% or higher in Gallup (since mid-October) has won, I'd go with that one.

[Necrosis]

Data that isn't available? HELLOOOOOOO!!! The early voting numbers are in. Obama is down, WAAAAY DOWN, just as predicted.

What are these so called "extraneous variable" that cut Obama early voting numbers in Ohio by nearly 75% (that is, besides his sorry record) again?

 

What part of "OVERSAMPLING DEMOCRATS" don't you understand? PPP polls (+9); CNN poll (+11), posted RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Not to mention the minor fact that in many of these precious polls of yours, Obama is in the mid-40s%. In most of them, it's tied. Incumbent presidents in the mid-40s tend to get beat.

Then, there's the poll you DON'T want to cite, namely Gallup, which had Romney at 50%. Considering that every challenger that's been at 50% or higher in Gallup (since mid-October) has won, I'd go with that one.

I fine with that one poll, the majority of others have the opposite, he could even win the popular vote and lose, which of course is the bigger problem for him, which is why he has such a poor shot at winning.

I give up on you, your comprehension is laughable, sit with what I said for a bit and see if the point I am making hits you in the face.

[MCWAY]

I fine with that one poll, the majority of others have the opposite, he could even win the popular vote and lose, which of course is the bigger problem for him, which is why he has such a poor shot at winning.

PLEASE! That has only happened four times in all of history. Here's the problem: It has NEVER OCCURED with a race involving an incumbent president.

As for that "one poll", it's (thus far) 100% accurate. Every challenger at 50% or higher in Gallup (mid-October onward) has WON!!

Even with all the polls you cite, the bulk of them has the race TIED. What usually happens to an incumbent president in tied races again?

OH, THEY LOSE!!! Why? The undecideds break for the challenger.

I give up on you, your comprehension is laughable, sit with what I said for a bit and see if the point I am making hits you in the face.

What's laughable is your pathetic attempt to hide from actual data (i.e. early voting numbers) that clearly show Obama is in trouble.

[dario73]

Does your post even make sense to you?

Yes. Romney is not the empty suit.