The 2012 Presidential Election: Obama Wins!!!!!!

[gellar]

Trying hard today gell?

In general, hardly trying.  Don't need to.  Thanks for asking though!

It's simple.  I rarely visit poll sites from any other referrer outside of Drudge, Gamingtrend, and Twitter.  I
The methodology each poll uses is of no concern to me. They're irrelevant to me.  Prior to you all's commitment of focusing on poling methodology and which polls I look at, I gave them little thought.  I could care less about Nate Silver or whoever else.  Historically I've used polls to gauge  momentum or shifts.  This,conversation started because I posted in response to the idea that Obama has some big lead, I posted proof that things have shifted drastically. Are there still polls with O leading?  Of course, but my point that started this sideshow discussion garbage, was and still is accurate.  Anyone that thinks this is in the bag for either candidate is delusional.

The issue is, you started off with the stance of 'it's not in the bag' (which I think most reasonable people with agree with) but constantly chime in with posts like "Looks to me like Romney's momentum continues, and he has drawn even in Ohio.  In addition, his lead amongst independents cannot be denied" and "Romney is leading in most reputable national polls, and in those polls, plus the lesser known polls where he is losing he is within the margin of error and LEADING amongst independents" and "Whatever though, I'm more encouraged by Romney's lead amongst Independents in almost every poll than I am anything else" with rarely any links to any credible data and THEN post things like "The biggest fallacy of his entire presidency is how "intellectual" you all think he is" that makes me really wonder if you are a) really this fucking stupid or b) playing the role of "dumb political whacko on the internet" to a tee.  

Either way, you seem to be enjoying it, which says more about you than you realize.

[CeeKay]

I got caught in a lie.  I really have no defense.  I'm sorry.

FTFY

I accept his apology.

[hepcat]

I enjoy the smooth taste of menthol cigarettes, the powerful feel of a foreign sports car, and the soft touch of a man.

FTFY

Your attempt at spinning the argument is silly.

I'm going to need to see some kind of poll to back that up.

[Eco-Logic]

Oh that's wonderful gellar really, but so incredibly not in the ballpark.

Quotes:

"Looks to me like Romney's momentum is continuing"

It has clearly continued since the first debate.

"He has drawn even in Ohio"

He has drawn even and is ahead in some pools.  This  Illustrates the point made above regarding Romney's momentum, in case your having trouble following.

Quote regarding lead amongst Independents
Romneys  "momentum" has led to a shift in independent support with Romney leading in many polls.

The fallacy quote is true.  My opinion of course.

The attempted diversion from the main point (Romney's Momentum), says all I need to know about you all.

[Calavera]

Nevermind...

[hepcat]

He has drawn even and is ahead in some pools. 

The thing is, I want a president, not Michael Phelps.

[gellar]

Oh that's wonderful gellar really, but so incredibly not in the ballpark.

Quotes:

"Looks to me like Romney's momentum is continuing"

It has clearly continued since the first debate.

"He has drawn even in Ohio"

He has drawn even and is ahead in some pools.  This  Illustrates the point made above regarding Romney's momentum, in case your having trouble following.

Quote regarding lead amongst Independents
Romneys  "momentum" has led to a shift in independent support with Romney leading in many polls.

The fallacy quote is true.  My opinion of course.

The attempted diversion from the main point (Romney's Momentum), says all I need to know about you all.

Riiiight.

I do hope your character on this forum is the latter of my two given possibilities.  If it's the former, hoo boy.

[Eco-Logic]

Following the script to a tee I see.

Divert
Insult (the fact they're such petty insults makes it even more pitch perfect)

I must say that the mood of this forum increases my hope that this trend will continue.

[hepcat]

I must say that the mood of this forum increases my hope that this trend will continue.

Why do you want us to continue feeling sorry for you?   

[gellar]

I think you're just upset that someone is calling you out on your trolling.  I actually don't think you're this stupid, to be honest.  Maybe it's the eternal optimist in me, who knows?

[gellar]

And frankly, I am disappointed.  To ATB's point, there is basically NO reasonable conservative viewpoint on this forum.  As a moderate, I only really come in here from time to time because it's not a lot of fun seeing a whole lot of 'YEAH DUDE FUCK THOSE REPUBLICANS' (effectively, not exactly) posts where everyone agrees.  There are a few controversial topics from time to time (Gun Control, for example) where we get some level of discussion, but when it comes to the POTUS or other general election bits, this forum is decidedly blue.  I'd like to see intelligent discourse on both sides, but clearly that's just not going to happen here.  For whatever reason, the conservative posters here tend to go full on retard. 

[Eco-Logic]

Trolling, wow.

All your (and your cronies), "posts" directed at me regarding this were entirely refuted and your modus operandi illustrated.

[hepcat]

For whatever reason, the conservative posters here tend to go full on retard.  

I don't think that's fair really.  Zeke was able to...

...I mean, Zeke would...

...Sometimes he'd...

...

sorry...I got nothin'.

All your (and your cronies), "posts" directed at me regarding this were entirely refuted and your modus operandi illustrated.

Comedy...gold.  

[Eco-Logic]

I don't have the patience to get into policy debates with Liberals I so vehemently disagree with on an online web forum. 

I do have the patience to point out to those same liberals that maybe they shouldn't feel quiet as confident in the election results.

[Calavera]

Trolling, wow.

All your (and your cronies), "posts" directed at me regarding this were entirely refuted and your modus operandi illustrated.

Wait, wait. You're trying to say you haven't been trolling?

Now I'm confused. I was pretty sure that this has pretty much devolved to one side trolling the other...

[hepcat]

This thread became a tribute to silliness a while ago.  Anyone coming into it with expectations of learning anything about politics is going to be profoundly disappointed.  It does entertain though, and sometimes that's all you want/need/can aspire to.

[CeeKay]

[Eel Snave]

I don't have any horse in this race, I just check in here every day or so to watch Eco flail around. This is fun.

 

[CeeKay]

6 pieces of junk mail for election day in the mail today, with a couple of other fliers on the door.  they were all republican.  I just tossed them in the trash since they've all been saying the same thing.  sure, I could have walked 3 extra steps to the recycle bin, but screw that noise, I don't want to be eco-friendly!

[CeeKay]

I have to admit Paul Ryan does have nice eyes:

[Eel Snave]

"Snap" - My brain

[Captain Caveman]

Eco, here you can see the results of all the recent polls in Ohio:

http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/oh-president-12

Spoiler alert: only one poll out of the last 20 shows Romney with a lead. And yes, it's the Rasmussen one you cited earlier.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade. Romney could squeak this out... but right now, the data show Obama is the favorite.

And yes, Rasmussen was pretty accurate in the national presidential spread in 2008-- though it was not the most accurate as you stated, but the 9th best out of all pollsters:

Rasmussen to be tied for 9th most accurate. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread.

And more relevant to the current discussion, Rasmussen was actually really bad in the state polls in 2008. It had Ohio tied on election eve, for example. Obama won it by over 4.5 points.

And since 2008, they've pretty much sucked, with an over-estimation of support for Republican candidates.

[Eco-Logic]

Thanks for the link, which further proves my point that this race is "in the bag"for neither candidate.

Obama used to lead in all polls in Ohio, outside the margin of error.  Now he is down in one, and within the margin of error in nearly all the others.  That is encouraging.

[Blackadar]

Thanks for the link, which further proves my point that this race is "in the bag"for neither candidate.

Obama used to lead in all polls in Ohio, outside the margin of error.  Now he is down in one, and within the margin of error in nearly all the others.  That is encouraging.

Has anyone claimed the race is "in the bag"? 

Eco-illogic strikes again!

[Eco-Logic]

You've obviously not been following the thread too much.

Fair effort though.

Hetz and someone else did earlier, which started the word vomit from everyone else.

[Scraper]

Thanks for the link, which further proves my point that this race is "in the bag"for neither candidate.

Obama used to lead in all polls in Ohio, outside the margin of error.  Now he is down in one, and within the margin of error in nearly all the others.  That is encouraging.

Has anyone claimed the race is "in the bag"? 

Eco-illogic strikes again!

That talk also started prior to the first debate, when Obama did have a nice lead. Then the first debate happened and Romney came back.

[hepcat]

This thread is here simply as a tool to shame Eco later in life.  

Thanks for the link, which further proves my point that this race is "in the bag"for neither candidate.

Hopefully you're including yourself in that point.

When Romney wins I'll be a happy bystander and promise not to gloat vet much. 

[Eco-Logic]

And the only reason it continued was a select few's insistence on going on a tangent regarding the polls I focus on.

[hepcat]

And the only reason it continued was a select few's insistence on going on a tangent regarding the polls I focus on.

It was the fact that you switch polls depending on which one's giving you the info you want that we found hilarious.   

[Eco-Logic]

And the only reason it continued was a select few's insistence on going on a tangent regarding the polls I focus on.

[ATB]

This thread became a tribute to silliness a while ago. 

More like a tribute to the early days of arguing on the internet before everyone understood how pointless it is.

[Razgon]

But surely *someone* will listen to reason?

[Eco-Logic]

I'm optimistic obviously, but it's too close for comfort.

This thread actually perfectly illustrates the liberal mentality that I find so nauseating and the only impact it'll have only impact on my life is reinforcing my belief that the we are royally screwed if your type are given more control.  Hep's posts in this thread are a perfect model of the democrat playbook that has plagued our country for years.

We have a fundamental disagreement, in that I believe if you or anyone label Obama as anything but an epic failure you probably ought to be tested before being allowed to vote. (I kid, sort of)

That is all.  Start your spinning now.

[hepcat]

This thread became a tribute to silliness a while ago. 

More like a tribute to the early days of arguing on the internet before everyone understood how pointless it is.

i.e. silliness

[hepcat]

I'm optimistic obviously, but it's too close for comfort.

This thread actually perfectly illustrates the liberal mentality that I find so nauseating and the only impact it'll have only impact on my life is reinforcing my belief that the we are royally screwed if your type are given more control.  Hep's posts in this thread are a perfect model of the democrat playbook that has plagued our country for years.

We have a fundamental disagreement, in that I believe if you or anyone label Obama as anything but an epic failure you probably ought to be tested before being allowed to vote. (I kid, sort of)

That is all.  Start your spinning now.

And this is why I discount your opinion as utterly ridiculous.  At no point in that post did you state any policies that you disagree with.  Nothing.  It was just the typical "I hate anyone that's not a republican" shit that defines the term "knee jerk".  

You've been taught to just jump on board with anything your political party tells you.   While many of us question or voice disagreement with some aspects of our chosen party's candidate, you march in unison with everyone in your group because that's all you're capable of.  Independent thought is as foreign to you as mindless acceptance is to everyone else in this thread.

Is it no wonder many of us view you as a joke and treat you accordingly?  

[Eco-Logic]

I disagree with Obama on almost everything.  Anyway, this is silly and I've said numerous times policy discussions with your type are even more pointless.

You think me doing nothing more than voicing my opinion makes me a joke, and I think you're a total joke because of your opinion.  Stalemate.

[hepcat]

...and again, a complete and utter failure to express even one salient point about why your choice in candidates is anything other than a mindless acceptance of the status quo.  

I expected no less from your type.  

[gellar]

Is it no wonder many of us view you as a joke and treat you accordingly? 

Ding ding. 

I respect and admire many Republicans.  I'd reckon it's a fifty fifty split between the parties amongst my peer group/friends, actually.  I'm the guy who bought a 'You're going to be disappointed!' bumper sticker (that I did not put on my bumper because thats fucking stupid) in 2008 so I could to say I TOLD YOU SO, FUCKERS.  In general, I find the vehement Obama supporters amongst the people I know and the people I read on the internet to be the most grating, ignorant, self-serving, and annoying.  Eco puts those people to shame.  AND ITS NOT EVEN CLOSE.

[rickfc]

We have a fundamental disagreement, in that I believe if you or anyone label Obama as anything but an epic failure you probably ought to be tested before being allowed to vote. (I kid, sort of)

So, what you're saying is that anyone that disagrees with your opinion should be put under more stringent requirements before they're allowed to vote. Tell me, does this also apply to those of the opposite sex, different ethnicity, and/or sexual preference?

[gellar]

We have a fundamental disagreement, in that I believe if you or anyone label Obama as anything but an epic failure you probably ought to be tested before being allowed to vote. (I kid, sort of)

So, what you're saying is that anyone that disagrees with your opinion should be put under more stringent requirements before they're allowed to vote. Tell me, does this also apply to those of the opposite sex, different ethnicity, and/or sexual preference?

Sort of.