OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Fox news just said election showed D +6 btw Nationally? I was watching CNN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Silver has called 49 of 49 states correct so far. Florida he put at 50.3% chance of an Obama win anyways, so it's hard to fault him if he gets that wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Nationally? I was watching CNN. Not sure Megan Kelly said "looks like it ended up D +6" when talking to someone about the election as a whole but I only caught it in passing Either way...I'm not here to kill you on it although I know you would ride it hard if you were right. But your take on the whole thing was just not very accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Not sure Megan Kelly said "looks like it ended up D +6" when talking to someone about the election as a whole but I only caught it in passing Either way...I'm not here to kill you on it although I know you would ride it hard if you were right. But your take on the whole thing was just not very accurate. My only take is either Gallup is wrong, or Axelrod is....and that Silver can never be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 My only take is either Gallup is wrong, or Axelrod is....and that Silver can never be wrong. I'd agree with that. Silver uses math. Axelrod probably uses his mustache or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggieScooby Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Nate Silver on fire. Damn intellectuals! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Silver called every state. D+6 is close to right according to Fox last night. Didn't check this morning. Obama improved his record among Hispanic voters. Gay marriage initiatives passing. Did I miss anything OC? Just busting your balls. At least you can take it. Time to revise your model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoutbox Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Nate Silver on fire. Damn intellectuals! Not at all shocking that mathematics and reason prevailed. Equally unsurprising that the argument from a guy who posts incessantly with incoherent, emoticon-laden rants didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Not at all shocking that mathematics and reason prevailed. Equally unsurprising that the argument from a guy who posts incessantly with incoherent, emoticon-laden rants didn't. There's no "i" in hubris....errr, wait, yes there is .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Silver called every state. D+6 is close to right according to Fox last night. Didn't check this morning. Obama improved his record among Hispanic voters. Gay marriage initiatives passing. Did I miss anything OC? Just busting your balls. At least you can take it. Time to revise your model. NY Times exit polls show Dem +6 (38-32) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Not at all shocking that mathematics and reason prevailed. Equally unsurprising that the argument from a guy who posts incessantly with incoherent, emoticon-laden rants didn't. While I agree with you, your comment is hilarious coming from "Marc Miller" with that avatar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 While I agree with you, your comment is hilarious coming from "Marc Miller" with that avatar. Pretty sure that is "the" Marc Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 NY Times exit polls show Dem +6 (38-32) So, it wasn't D+8-11 like some polls showed. It looks like 1/2 the analysis was right - Obama got 10M fewer votes than 2008. That is ginormous. What was wrong was that the R's would be out in greater force this election after sitting on the sideline. Romney couldn't even equal McCain's vote total... Both facts supported my view - this president isn't very popular and Romney was not a compelling replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So, it wasn't D+8-11 like some polls showed. It looks like 1/2 the analysis was right - Obama got 10M fewer votes than 2008. That is ginormous. What was wrong was that the R's would be out in greater force this election after sitting on the sideline. Romney couldn't even equal McCain's vote total... Both facts supported my view - this president isn't very popular and Romney was not a compelling replacement. That, but it was the social issues that won the day. The majority is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Concern over Mitt's social policies overwhelmed concern over O's economic policies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 That, but it was the social issues that won the day. The majority is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Concern over Mitt's social policies overwhelmed concern over O's economic policies. Not sure that's true. Mitt was never a social issues candidate. He completely de-emphasized that throughout his campaign and tried to focus on the economy and in the later stages also foreign policy. He made zero in-roads with any Obama base constituency. The Dem base is solidly Dem--the Reps need to find an issue to divide that base if they want to make inroads. Reagan did it in welcoming the religious right out of the traditional Dem South. The current Rep party needs to find an issue they can live with if they want a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Not sure that's true. Mitt was never a social issues candidate. He completely de-emphasized that throughout his campaign and tried to focus on the economy and in the later stages also foreign policy. He made zero in-roads with any Obama base constituency. The Dem base is solidly Dem--the Reps need to find an issue to divide that base if they want to make inroads. Reagan did it in welcoming the religious right out of the traditional Dem South. The current Rep party needs to find an issue they can live with if they want a chance. Agreed. I don't think social policy was a factor AT ALL in this election. Sadly, this campaign was largely about nothing. It was a popularity contest. I kept hearing people say how huge this election is and will determine how this country moves forward forever. I wasn't buying it. This was an uninspired campaign and Romney was an uninspiring candidate. I know it is crazy to look ahead to 2016, but if the Republicans don't go off the deep end, they are the favorite to win the White House IMO. Some good up and coming candidates. And the Dems don't have much to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 That, but it was the social issues that won the day. The majority is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Concern over Mitt's social policies overwhelmed concern over O's economic policies. Sorta, but not like you explained it. Romney could care less about social issues and because of that he allowed Obama to pick a couple of them to shore up support for his 2008 base. Abortion was never going to be on anyone's agenda in a Romney administration. However, Obama needed to make sure he kept as many women as possible, so he used that non-issue to drive a false wedge to stop any potential bleeding from the women's vote. With Romney being silent on it, Obama was successful in his fear-mongering and division to hold on to his coalition. This was another example of how his lofty unification rhetoric is complete BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Sorta, but not like you explained it. Romney could care less about social issues and because of that he allowed Obama to pick a couple of them to shore up support for his 2008 base. Abortion was never going to be on anyone's agenda in a Romney administration. However, Obama needed to make sure he kept as many women as possible, so he used that non-issue to drive a false wedge to stop any potential bleeding from the women's vote. With Romney being silent on it, Obama was successful in his fear-mongering and division to hold on to his coalition. This was another example of how his lofty unification rhetoric is complete BS. however you want to express it: women were concerned about how a Romney admin would handle social issues important to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) The bottom line is women were concerned b/c the platform and rhetoric and supreme court choices of the GOP are concerning. SDS blames Obama for pointing this out. Look at the GOP first my brother. The party has gone off the deep end on the one, going backwards In the end it's quite simple IMO and comes down to what I thought during the GOP primaries: "are people seriously going to throw Obama out for Mit Romney in mass across this nation?" The answer was no. Edited November 7, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 however you want to express it: women were concerned about how a Romney admin would handle social issues important to them. Some women in Obama's coalition, not all... and only because Romney let Obama make a strawman issue out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts