Romney/Ryan VICTORY Thread.

[POB]

it's going to be fun watching 333 and McWay console each other

At least mc showed, lets hope 333 nuse broke

[The True Adonis]

At least mc showed, lets hope 333 nuse broke

ROFLMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[magikusar]

all went to Obama because they have densely populated areas that vote democratic.

Pretty simple.

illegals then?

[240 is Back]

see, the dems KNOW what they are.   Hilary and Obama were 99% the same on the issues.

But the GOP?  Huntsman and Santorum are different on half the issues!  

Until they decide what they are, they can't win.  The GOP base didn't vote in 2008 and they didn't vote today either.  The cost of  obamacare and 7 trillion in debt was TWO STATES - that's it!  

Repubs, please, figure out what you stand for.   We have 3 parties right now... Dems, Moderate/RINOs, and Tea Party.    Dems keep winning with 40% of the nation behind them.

[POB]

see, the dems KNOW what they are.   Hilary and Obama were 99% the same on the issues.

But the GOP?  Huntsman and Santorum are different on half the issues!  

Until they decide what they are, they can't win.  The GOP base didn't vote in 2008 and they didn't vote today either.  The cost of  obamacare and 7 trillion in debt was TWO STATES - that's it!  

Repubs, please, figure out what you stand for.   We have 3 parties right now... Dems, Moderate/RINOs, and Tea Party.    Dems keep winning with 40% of the nation behind them.

They need to blow it up and get with the times. They can keep selling tax cuts for the rich tax increase for everyone else,SS/Medicare cuts,no write offs ect, people aren't buying what they are selling...

[240 is Back]

you can't bullshit people with the internet.   dems KNEW about embassy attack.  Repubs KNEW about romney's dozen flip flops.

You can't say one thing to one room, and another to the next, without being busted.

obama realized that and publicly admitted his shitty positions.  Romney is old and out of touch - thought he could say things in certain rooms, never expected a 47% videotape or all the youtube clips showing him flipping.

The new canddiate in 2016 needs to be shrewd and younger and wiser.  businessman?   Romney, Perot, no that's not working...

[magikusar]

you can't bullshit people with the internet.   dems KNEW about embassy attack.  Repubs KNEW about romney's dozen flip flops.

You can't say one thing to one room, and another to the next, without being busted.

obama realized that and publicly admitted his shitty positions.  Romney is old and out of touch - thought he could say things in certain rooms, never expected a 47% videotape or all the youtube clips showing him flipping.

The new canddiate in 2016 needs to be shrewd and younger and wiser.  businessman?   Romney, Perot, no that's not working...

calm down commy

Obama admitted nothing and had candy lie for him on national TV in debate 2.

I blame schools and media.
When government schools brainwash kids this hard is sickening.

There is no logical explanation for an obama win.

Guy was worst president by numbers in history.

[24KT]

Can we kill this thread yet?

Seems silly since there is no victory here.

Are you kidding me? This is GOLDEN!
It can be the thorn in 333386's eye, that just won't go away, ...and a sticky at that! 

I wonder how he's ever going to live this down? Probably run off with his tail between his legs, bottle of vodka in hand, and claim his power hasn't been restored yet.  Cheer up 333, after all, there's always Sarah Palin in 2016. 

[The Enigma]

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio
 Disreport ^

Posted on Tuesday, November 06, 2012 12:29:15 PM by Arthurio

by Trevor Antley and Calvin Roberts.

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio

Abstract: Actual reported early voting data requires that early voting will represent no more than 32% of total vote in Ohio, while virtually every poll was weighted for early voting to occupy ~35-40% of total votes cast. The smaller-than-expected number of early votes means one of two things: 1) 2012 will see historically low voter turnout in Ohio; or 2) Mitt Romney has a much better chance at Ohio than polls assumed.

Late Monday night the Ohio Secretary of State released the “final” early voting results from Ohio’s counties. The results got the attention — and slight consternation — of the New York Times’ Nate Silver. Dave Wasserman kindly put the data into a spreadsheet here, which tabulates early voting results by county and compares that data to early voting results from 2008. Wasserman’s spreadsheet also notes Kerry’s 2004 margins and Obama’s 2008 margins, allowing one to effectively deduce the partisan-leanings of each county.

In a discussion on Twitter, Silver and Wasserman focused largely on the surprise changes in turnout in many of Ohio’s counties. While total early voting in Ohio only increased by 2.44% from 2008, early voting in counties that voted heavily for Kerry/Obama declined 4.1% while counties that voted heavily Bush/McCain increased their early voting by a shocking 14.39%. Wisserman, while still predicting an Obama victory, suggested that trend meant a tighter race in Ohio than expected and suggested it might undercut Nate Silver’s famous forecast. Nate Silver’s response: “I’ll stick with the 538 forecast in OH. I disagree that the early voting data there provides much reason to doubt the polls.”

Seemingly overlooked by Silver, however, during the discussion of county-by-county results was the simple number of total reported early votes: a meager 1,787,346. As stated above, this number shows a 2.44% increase in early voting from 2008 — but the number is still surprisingly low. Virtually every Ohio poll this cycle was weighted on the basis that early voting would occupy a massive chunk of the total Ohio vote. Rasmussen’s final poll ceded 40% of the total vote to early voters (EVs). PPP gave EV’s a more reasonable 35%. The Columbus Dispatch calculated early voting to take up an astounding 47% of the total Ohio vote. Almost every other Ohio poll seems to have weighted early voting between 35% and 45% of the total vote.

The reported early voting numbers, however, show that virtually every single Ohio poll overestimated the amount of early votes cast. If early voting is calculated at 1,787,346, in order for total voter turnout to rival 2004 numbers, early voting cannot occupy more than 32% of the total votes cast — and even in that scenario, that high of a percentage means that total voter turnout will be lower than it was in 2008. In order for turnout to match 2008 levels, early voting can only account for 31% of total votes cast.

The next important piece of data is what the polls consistently report: Obama leads by huge margins among early voters but trails Romney among those who say they will vote on election day. This inverse in voting segments is why the proportion of early votes in the total votes — and that virtually every poll overestimated this proportion — is so tantamount. In most polls (which usually only have Obama leading by a small margin, although some give him a more comfortable ~+5%), lowering the percentage of early votes in the polling sample means lowering Obama’s lead drastically. And when Obama’s lead is only one or two percentage points, that can mean handing the election to Mitt Romney.

Our forecast is based largely on the reported margins between Romney and Obama among early voters and election day voters as reported by the Columbus Dispatch, Rasmussen, and other polls (all polling data considered is represented in the graphic below). The Columbus Dispatch gives Obama +15% among early voters; Rasmussen gives him a much wider 23%. Other polls for Ohio EVs: CNN/Opinion Research, Obama +28; Gravis Marketing, Obama +13; PPP, Obama +21. For our forecast we assumed a more conservative Obama +18 among EVs, averaging Rasmussen and the Columbus Dispatch.

In 2008 Obama won 58% of early voting against John McCain, who had virtually no get-out-the-vote infrastructure in Ohio; our model, giving Obama a 18% lead, again assumes he will win that 58% of early voters despite the fact that Mitt Romney is putting forth a much more competitive get-out-the-vote campaign and disregarding the GOP-leaning trend in early voting results of individual Ohio counties. When one considers the results from individual Ohio counties this cycle, Obama’s actual margin among EVs may actually be much lower (although without specific partisan data, it’s also possible that Obama’s margins have actually increased — although this seems extraordinarily more unlikely). But because this is impossible to determine without actual breakdowns of the early vote, which are not yet available, those implications are not included in this model.

In determining the margin among election day voters, the same polls were considered. For election day voters, Rasmussen has Romney +15; Columbus Dispatch, Romney +11; and CNN/Opinion Research, Romney +13. PPP and Gravis Marketing both had Romney’s election day margins at a much smaller +3. For our forecast, we assume Romney’s election day voter margins at 13%, an average of the first three polls. The consistency and disparity between the first three and the latter two polls made it difficult to average them since margins of error do not explain such a clear discrepancy between the two groups.

In this scenario — which seems to be supported by the majority of polls and early voting trends (but is notably not supported by all polls, as seen in the previous paragraph) — Romney should win Ohio. Based on these assumptions — which in turn are based on a combination of polling data and the state’s actual reported early vote — if early voting accounts for 32% of the vote (a very conservative number which would place total voter turnout slightly below that of 2004), Romney wins by a whopping 50.9% to Obama’s 47.8%. The higher voter turnout is — and therefore the lower the percentage of early votes in total votes — the higher Romney’s margin becomes.

In this scenario, even if we assume our model’s margins between Obama and Romney among early voters and election day voters are somehow skewed in Romney’s favor, Romney still has padding that those margins could be reduced and he still wins. If early voting is only 31% of the total vote — putting Ohio’s total vote at just above 2008 levels — Romney has incredibly more wiggle room.

The lower-than-anticipated turnout among early voters suggests the Obama campaign’s lead in Ohio was largely hot air. And this does not even seriously consider the county-by-county early voting results, which appear to be even more damaging to Obama.

Reasons Why This Projection May Turn Out to be Wrong

In the case that the final early voting numbers reported by the Ohio secretary of state are incorrect and the final early voting results will include statistically significant additions, obviously this projection will have no meaning. As seen above, some of the polling data used in the projection (such as Romney’s margin among election day voters) is supported by several independent polling organizations but not by some others. If it turns out that the fewer polls’ results were right, then obviously our entire model is skewed too heavily towards Romney. Some have raised the possibility that effects from Hurricane Sandy stifled early voting in the final days and these early voters will simply vote for Obama on election day, increasing his election day margins beyond what polls indicated. In this scenario the polls are essentially still correct; Obama’s early voting margin was simply reallocated to his election day margin. There is no solid data to show that this is the case, but it is certainly possible. There is always the chance that the government and electorate will decide simply to defer to Nate Silver’s forecast and forget this whole voting nonsense. Since our forecast is based largely on actual votes, not subjectively weighted aggregates of polls, this would make our projection essentially meaningless. About these ads

Share this:

Like this: Like Be the first to like this.

LOSER!

[Option D]

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio
 Disreport ^

Posted on Tuesday, November 06, 2012 12:29:15 PM by Arthurio

by Trevor Antley and Calvin Roberts.

Forecast: Mitt Romney Will Likely Win Ohio

Abstract: Actual reported early voting data requires that early voting will represent no more than 32% of total vote in Ohio, while virtually every poll was weighted for early voting to occupy ~35-40% of total votes cast. The smaller-than-expected number of early votes means one of two things: 1) 2012 will see historically low voter turnout in Ohio; or 2) Mitt Romney has a much better chance at Ohio than polls assumed.

Late Monday night the Ohio Secretary of State released the “final” early voting results from Ohio’s counties. The results got the attention — and slight consternation — of the New York Times’ Nate Silver. Dave Wasserman kindly put the data into a spreadsheet here, which tabulates early voting results by county and compares that data to early voting results from 2008. Wasserman’s spreadsheet also notes Kerry’s 2004 margins and Obama’s 2008 margins, allowing one to effectively deduce the partisan-leanings of each county.

In a discussion on Twitter, Silver and Wasserman focused largely on the surprise changes in turnout in many of Ohio’s counties. While total early voting in Ohio only increased by 2.44% from 2008, early voting in counties that voted heavily for Kerry/Obama declined 4.1% while counties that voted heavily Bush/McCain increased their early voting by a shocking 14.39%. Wisserman, while still predicting an Obama victory, suggested that trend meant a tighter race in Ohio than expected and suggested it might undercut Nate Silver’s famous forecast. Nate Silver’s response: “I’ll stick with the 538 forecast in OH. I disagree that the early voting data there provides much reason to doubt the polls.”

Seemingly overlooked by Silver, however, during the discussion of county-by-county results was the simple number of total reported early votes: a meager 1,787,346. As stated above, this number shows a 2.44% increase in early voting from 2008 — but the number is still surprisingly low. Virtually every Ohio poll this cycle was weighted on the basis that early voting would occupy a massive chunk of the total Ohio vote. Rasmussen’s final poll ceded 40% of the total vote to early voters (EVs). PPP gave EV’s a more reasonable 35%. The Columbus Dispatch calculated early voting to take up an astounding 47% of the total Ohio vote. Almost every other Ohio poll seems to have weighted early voting between 35% and 45% of the total vote.

The reported early voting numbers, however, show that virtually every single Ohio poll overestimated the amount of early votes cast. If early voting is calculated at 1,787,346, in order for total voter turnout to rival 2004 numbers, early voting cannot occupy more than 32% of the total votes cast — and even in that scenario, that high of a percentage means that total voter turnout will be lower than it was in 2008. In order for turnout to match 2008 levels, early voting can only account for 31% of total votes cast.

The next important piece of data is what the polls consistently report: Obama leads by huge margins among early voters but trails Romney among those who say they will vote on election day. This inverse in voting segments is why the proportion of early votes in the total votes — and that virtually every poll overestimated this proportion — is so tantamount. In most polls (which usually only have Obama leading by a small margin, although some give him a more comfortable ~+5%), lowering the percentage of early votes in the polling sample means lowering Obama’s lead drastically. And when Obama’s lead is only one or two percentage points, that can mean handing the election to Mitt Romney.

Our forecast is based largely on the reported margins between Romney and Obama among early voters and election day voters as reported by the Columbus Dispatch, Rasmussen, and other polls (all polling data considered is represented in the graphic below). The Columbus Dispatch gives Obama +15% among early voters; Rasmussen gives him a much wider 23%. Other polls for Ohio EVs: CNN/Opinion Research, Obama +28; Gravis Marketing, Obama +13; PPP, Obama +21. For our forecast we assumed a more conservative Obama +18 among EVs, averaging Rasmussen and the Columbus Dispatch.

In 2008 Obama won 58% of early voting against John McCain, who had virtually no get-out-the-vote infrastructure in Ohio; our model, giving Obama a 18% lead, again assumes he will win that 58% of early voters despite the fact that Mitt Romney is putting forth a much more competitive get-out-the-vote campaign and disregarding the GOP-leaning trend in early voting results of individual Ohio counties. When one considers the results from individual Ohio counties this cycle, Obama’s actual margin among EVs may actually be much lower (although without specific partisan data, it’s also possible that Obama’s margins have actually increased — although this seems extraordinarily more unlikely). But because this is impossible to determine without actual breakdowns of the early vote, which are not yet available, those implications are not included in this model.

In determining the margin among election day voters, the same polls were considered. For election day voters, Rasmussen has Romney +15; Columbus Dispatch, Romney +11; and CNN/Opinion Research, Romney +13. PPP and Gravis Marketing both had Romney’s election day margins at a much smaller +3. For our forecast, we assume Romney’s election day voter margins at 13%, an average of the first three polls. The consistency and disparity between the first three and the latter two polls made it difficult to average them since margins of error do not explain such a clear discrepancy between the two groups.

In this scenario — which seems to be supported by the majority of polls and early voting trends (but is notably not supported by all polls, as seen in the previous paragraph) — Romney should win Ohio. Based on these assumptions — which in turn are based on a combination of polling data and the state’s actual reported early vote — if early voting accounts for 32% of the vote (a very conservative number which would place total voter turnout slightly below that of 2004), Romney wins by a whopping 50.9% to Obama’s 47.8%. The higher voter turnout is — and therefore the lower the percentage of early votes in total votes — the higher Romney’s margin becomes.

In this scenario, even if we assume our model’s margins between Obama and Romney among early voters and election day voters are somehow skewed in Romney’s favor, Romney still has padding that those margins could be reduced and he still wins. If early voting is only 31% of the total vote — putting Ohio’s total vote at just above 2008 levels — Romney has incredibly more wiggle room.

The lower-than-anticipated turnout among early voters suggests the Obama campaign’s lead in Ohio was largely hot air. And this does not even seriously consider the county-by-county early voting results, which appear to be even more damaging to Obama.

Reasons Why This Projection May Turn Out to be Wrong

In the case that the final early voting numbers reported by the Ohio secretary of state are incorrect and the final early voting results will include statistically significant additions, obviously this projection will have no meaning. As seen above, some of the polling data used in the projection (such as Romney’s margin among election day voters) is supported by several independent polling organizations but not by some others. If it turns out that the fewer polls’ results were right, then obviously our entire model is skewed too heavily towards Romney. Some have raised the possibility that effects from Hurricane Sandy stifled early voting in the final days and these early voters will simply vote for Obama on election day, increasing his election day margins beyond what polls indicated. In this scenario the polls are essentially still correct; Obama’s early voting margin was simply reallocated to his election day margin. There is no solid data to show that this is the case, but it is certainly possible. There is always the chance that the government and electorate will decide simply to defer to Nate Silver’s forecast and forget this whole voting nonsense. Since our forecast is based largely on actual votes, not subjectively weighted aggregates of polls, this would make our projection essentially meaningless. About these ads

Share this:

Like this: Like Be the first to like this.

Wrong

[The True Adonis]

Wrong

Just wait for the early voting numbers.

[MCWAY]

Just wait for the early voting numbers.

Still ribbing me about that?

The early voting numbers were as I said they were......WAAAY DOWN from 2008.

I mentioned, from the get-go, that Romney had to close the gap on election day. But, thanks to his bleeding Latino voters, that didn't happen.

He didn't get Virginia or Florida or Colorado (where he was actually ahead in early voting) and barely got North Carolina, as a result.

[Necrosis]

Still ribbing me about that?

The early voting numbers were as I said they were......WAAAY DOWN from 2008.

I mentioned, from the get-go, that Romney had to close the gap on election day. But, thanks to his bleeding Latino voters, that didn't happen.

He didn't get Virginia or Florida or Colorado (where he was actually ahead in early voting) and barely got North Carolina, as a result.

You ignored all reports and raw data contrary to the "early voting" numbers. You placed all your weight into that one stat, while others like Nate silver got it right because he looked at all the data.

you were and still are in the midst of confirmation bias.

[240 is Back]

Obama got 10 million fewer votes.

And he still won.

WTF

[timfogarty]

Obama got 10 million fewer votes.

And he still won.

WTF

10 million fewer than what?   Current count is 60 million for Obama and 57 million for Romney

[The True Adonis]

10 million fewer than what?   Current count is 60 million for Obama and 57 million for Romney

From the last election.

[MCWAY]

You ignored all reports and raw data contrary to the "early voting" numbers. You placed all your weight into that one stat, while others like Nate silver got it right because he looked at all the data.

you were and still are in the midst of confirmation bias.

No, I didn't. I cited those polls, along with the internals. Hence, I got the numbers for the independents and the female vote.

Romney got higher numbers with white voters, with males, with independents and did better in early voting than McCain did.

But, he DID NOT close the gap by getting the turnout on election day. And I repeatedly stated that his doing such was pivotal to his winning. I said he had to at least MATCH McCain. He didn't even do that, especially with Latinos.

[Straw Man]

Still ribbing me about that?

The early voting numbers were as I said they were......WAAAY DOWN from 2008.

I mentioned, from the get-go, that Romney had to close the gap on election day. But, thanks to his bleeding Latino voters, that didn't happen.

He didn't get Virginia or Florida or Colorado (where he was actually ahead in early voting) and barely got North Carolina, as a result.

As i mentioned at least a few times, given that many states cut way back on early voting it makes perfect sense for the numbers to be down but that would only mean those people would now have to vote on election day which is exactly what happened

[MCWAY]

As i mentioned at least a few times, given that many states cut way back on early voting it makes perfect sense for the numbers to be down but that would only mean those people would now have to vote on election day which is exactly what happened

But, that wasn't quite the case in the swing states, which I listed.

Romney simply didn't close the deal.

[Straw Man]

But, that wasn't quite the case in the swing states, which I listed.

Romney simply didn't close the deal.

I don't recall those posts
You're saying you listed swing states where early voter turnout was the same or greater than 2008?

[MCWAY]

I don't recall those posts
You're saying you listed swing states where early voter turnout was the same or greater than 2008?

You didn't see the numbers I posted from Politico, citing the swing states, the numbers of early votes that had been tallied and how many went to the Dems vs. the GOP?

[Straw Man]

You didn't see the numbers I posted from Politico, citing the swing states, the numbers of early votes that had been tallied and how many went to the Dems vs. the GOP?

Sorry man, i cant recall all of your posts

BTW.  I give you credit for showing up today

I think you're the only one to show up and take your lumps

[chadstallion]

SOMEONE call the hospitals; the psych wards....

333386 is missing.

He's presumed armed and dangerous - to himself.

Please come back !!!

[ hint-if you only had posted a few more anti Obama posts I'm sure all these months of your rants would have made a difference here]

I miss my bro.
sorta like Ennis missed Jack.

[The True Adonis]

SOMEONE call the hospitals; the psych wards....

333386 is missing.

He's presumed armed and dangerous - to himself.

Please come back !!!

[ hint-if you only had posted a few more anti Obama posts I'm sure all these months of your rants would have made a difference here]

I miss my bro.
sorta like Ennis missed Jack.

We will always have the Search and Back button.  Something tells me in my heart that he won`t quit us just yet.

[tu_holmes]

Obama got 10 million fewer votes.

And he still won.

WTF

2 reasons... Republican social issues at a national level are a disaster and the fact that people are apathetic to the system in the first place.