Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
softwareNerd

Who gets your vote on Tuesday?

Rate this topic

  

32 members have voted

  1. 1. Whom will you vote for as President (or have already voted for)

    • Mitt Romney
      15
    • Barack Obama
      1
    • Gary Johnson
      6
    • Other party's candidate
      0
    • Write in candidate
      1
    • Will not vote even though I can legally do so
      4
    • Cannot vote in U.S. election 2012
      5


Recommended Posts

I hate the "let's just focus on replacing the current problem, without paying any attention to what it's being replaced by" attitude. It's not gonna lead to anything good, ever.

I think the most likely 2016 GOP nominee would be Paul Ryan. He has some clear ideas that distinguish him from moderate Republicans and Democrats.

What is the precedent for nominating a failed VP candidate as the Presidential candidate?

Another thing to consdier is that if Romney wins this election and the next, Ryan will very likely be the 2020 nominee.

Edited by oso

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the most likely 2016 GOP nominee would be Paul Ryan. He has some clear ideas that distinguish him from moderate Republicans and Democrats.
Yes, that is likely. He's a bit like Newt -- not seen as moderate either on economics or social issues -- and has Newt's rhetorical ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the most likely 2016 GOP nominee would be Paul Ryan. He has some clear ideas that distinguish him from moderate Republicans and Democrats.

The most likely 2016 GOP nominee will be incumbent president Romney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure? How likely is Romney to be elected tomorrow on a scale of 1 to 10?

10.

Why? Because Romney polls even with Obama in skewed polls with way more democrats than republicans in them. Such as this CNN poll where on page 29 it gives the breakdown

Among those likely voters, 41% described themselves as Democrats, 29% described themselves as Independents, and 30% described themselves as Republicans.

Demoncrats are +11 in that sample, and there is no way in hell that matches the actual electorate in 2012. The 2010 election season rebellion against Obama continues, and relying upon the 2008 election season voter breakdown is simply wrong.

On page 34 the independents are favoring Romney by 59/35 %.

Edited by Grames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply, Grames. I was just going to make reference to that very CNN poll which I found five minutes ago at Townhall.com. This is, of course, a recurring pattern. The polls have been skewed for much of the campaign season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? Because Romney polls even with Obama in skewed polls with way more democrats than republicans in them. Such as this CNN pollwhere on page 29 it gives the breakdown

They interviewed random people (well, a representative sample according to various demographics), and more happen consider themselves Democrat than Republican at the moment. That doesn't make the poll skewed. They did not consider political affiliation when deciding who to interview. That's just a myth spread in right wing circles.

The thing that may work in Romney's favor, however, is voter enthusiasm. They are only interviewing likely voters, but I don't think it's possible to factor in the degree to which voters for the two camps are "likely" to vote, once they pass a certain minimum threshold. So, it's possible that Romney voters are more likely to vote, which would invalidate the polls (which favor Obama both nationally and in most swing states, to the tune of around 300 electoral seats).

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They interviewed random people (well, a representative sample according to various demographics), and more happen consider themselves Democrat than Republican at the moment. That doesn't make the poll skewed. They did not consider political affiliation when deciding who to interview. That's just a myth spread in right wing circles.

I advance no hypothesis as to how it comes about that a supposedly random sample ends up with 11% more democrats than republicans. I merely note the astounding absence of correspondence between that sample and the actual electorate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I advance no hypothesis as to how it comes about that a supposedly random sample ends up with 11% more democrats than republicans. I merely note the astounding absence of correspondence between that sample and the actual electorate.

Where are you getting this "actual electorate" from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are you getting this "actual electorate" from?

Exit polling that determined the composition of voters in the 2008 and 2010 election seasons. Obama cannot be doing better today than he did in 2008, and there is actual hard evidence from 2010 he will do much worse based just on party registration shifts.

Links: NY Times "Rightward, March: The Midterm Exit Polls" and "Portrait of the Electorate"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exit polling that determined the composition of voters in the 2008 and 2010 election seasons. Obama cannot be doing better today than he did in 2008, and there is actual hard evidence from 2010 he will do much worse based just on party registration shifts.

Links: NY Times "Rightward, March: The Midterm Exit Polls" and "Portrait of the Electorate"

The party identification question is not about Obama, it's about parties. And exit polls ask a different question, in a different context from the question being asked now. Drawing a comparison between the two things is baseless.

When polls ask the same party identification question in a similar context to this one (not right after voting, but between elections or before them), Republican leaning Americans have been identifying themselves as independent in greater and greater numbers over the past few years. (while Democrats have been sticking with their party). In the past at least ten years, I have never seen a single poll asking the party identification question, where Democrats did not outnumber Republicans by several percentage points.

When the polls then ask independents which party they lean towards, the Republicans make up the lost ground and end up overall even with Democrats. That confirms the results of current polls, putting the percentage of self-described Democrats 8 to 11 points above self described Republicans, but with self described independents leaning Republican and voting Romney by a wide margin.

There's no conspiracy, this is just Republican voting people who don't like to affiliate themselves with the GOP for various reasons (I'm guessing it's mostly because they vote Republican as the "lesser evil", instead of out of conviction).

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The party identification question is not about Obama, it's about parties. And exit polls ask a different question, in a different context from the question being asked now. Drawing a comparison between the two things is baseless.

The change in party registration from one election season to the next is largely due to get-out-the-vote (GOTV) efforts, which in turn are largely due to the approval or disapproval of the current officeholder, in this case Obama. Four years earlier it was Bush who was the drag on party affiliation, and even though he was not running for office Obama campaigned against him (and has continued to attribute every setback in the last 4 years to Bush). So the connection between Obama and party affiliation in both motivating voters to vote-for and to vote-against is not baseless.

In a few hours I'll be be able to crow or eat crow, so there is no point in making a long post debating polling techniques.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First time voting, and I went with Romney.. because of the poker analogy. Indiana.

Well, if you are in Indiana you can safely vote for Gary Johnson if you want. As far as the poker analogy is concerned, it still applies but you only need to anticipate and play against the people at your own table. "Own table" means "own state" for presidential and senatorial candidates and "own district" for representatives to the House. Your own state is +10 Romney, granting you a certain freedom of action in your presidential vote. You still need to vote for Mourdock in the Senate though if you want to see Obamacare repealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When the polls then ask independents which party they lean towards, the Republicans make up the lost ground and end up overall even with Democrats. That confirms the results of current polls, putting the percentage of self-described Democrats 8 to 11 points above self described Republicans, but with self described independents leaning Republican and voting Romney by a wide margin.There's no conspiracy, this is just Republican voting people who don't like to affiliate themselves with the GOP for various reasons (I'm guessing it's mostly because they vote Republican as the "lesser evil", instead of out of conviction).

Without additional comment: from Rasmussen Reports

Summary of Party Affiliation

October 31, 2012

Republican Democrat Other R - D

39.1% 33.3% 27.5% 5.8%

Edited by Grames

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without additional comment: from Rasmussen Reports

Summary of Party Affiliation

October 31, 2012

Republican Democrat Other R - D

39.1% 33.3% 27.5% 5.8%

If I may be so bold, I'm willing to make a prediction based on this data: Romney wins by no less than 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without additional comment: from Rasmussen Reports

Summary of Party Affiliation

October 31, 2012

Republican Democrat Other R - D

39.1% 33.3% 27.5% 5.8%

Doesn't seem like that's among likely voters like the CNN poll. It also doesn't say what the question being asked is. The results of a poll depend greatly on the question asked. A poll using a different question and asking a different category of people can't be used to try and prove a point about the CNN poll.

If I may be so bold, I'm willing to make a prediction based on this data: Romney wins by no less than 7.

If you're wrong, are you willing to promise to never ever mention anything you got off of right wing websites on this forum again?

Edited by Nicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't seem like that's among likely voters like the CNN poll. It also doesn't say what the question being asked is. The results of a poll depend greatly on the question asked. A poll using a different question and asking a different category of people can't be used to try and prove a point about the CNN poll.

If you're wrong, are you willing to promise to never ever mention anything you got off of right wing websites on this forum again?

Rasmussen's data isn't from a right wing site. It's a non-partisan polling firm and, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't an Objectivism site like this one considered quite a bit "right wing" to certain folks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10.

Why? Because Romney polls even with Obama in skewed polls with way more democrats than republicans in them. Such as this CNN pollwhere on page 29 it gives the breakdown

Demoncrats are +11 in that sample, and there is no way in hell that matches the actual electorate in 2012. The 2010 election season rebellion against Obama continues, and relying upon the 2008 election season voter breakdown is simply wrong.

On page 34 the independents are favoring Romney by 59/35 %.

Looks like Romney is winning the popular vote by a hair, but completely losing the electoral vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rasmussen's data isn't from a right wing site. It's a non-partisan polling firm and, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't an Objectivism site like this one considered quite a bit "right wing" to certain folks?

Rasmussen didn't predict a Romney landslide, you did. And you based it on unscientific conspiracy theories about various other pollsters and their alleged Democratic bias, not on anything from Rasmussen.

Also, Rasmussen, unlike the other polls, did use political affiliation when weighting the responses. The other polls did not, they recognized that political affiliations change, and instead stuck to weighting responses based only on constants like demographics. That makes them slightly less accurate on occasion (whenever Rasmussen gets party affiliation right by luck) but far more reliable.

This time, Rasmussen didn't, so he was significantly off. Not as off as you though. Care to offer an explanation on where you went wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...