Results 81 to 90 of 148
Thread: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
-
11-03-12, 01:40 PM #81
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
I dont give him credit because he made the same choice everyone else would have made and he watched it on tv. I would have made the same call so thats pretty close to me taking credit for killing him. What irritates me is its a political talking point for him taking credit. Pass that shit where it needs to be and stfu.
-Lazarus- liked this post
-
11-03-12, 01:42 PM #82
LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
No. What I'm saying is that since he calls himself a liberal and is also an activist for Obama on his blog, I suspect his methods from the start.
No I'm not happy with the fact that he designates states that are traditionally Democrat and have almost always voted that way as swing states. He does this to pad his analysis of battleground states, to paint a skewed picture of what is actually happening in swing states. I've been following him for a while and he does this sort of thing pretty regularly. Including these states, with a clear statistical lead, and calling states within the margin of error for Obama (even though the momentum may have been on Romney's side), Silver can and does paint a bleak overall picture of what the swing states will look like for Romney that doesn't match reality. For me, this analysis just doesn't hold water. In my opinion it represents a bias amounting to wishful thinking on Silver's part in this case. I respect the guy but I think he is biased.
I see your point but every one I those polls has a margin of error for a reason. To try and call a state and say that the polls are clear is disingenuous. Silver does this all the time, again in my opinion expressing more wishful thinking than valid statistical analysis.
He cherry picked the outlying Obama polls and then defended doing that with some arguments that I disagreed with. That's all I was saying there.
Or there could be no conspiracy at all and he could just be a self avowed liberal that really wants Obama to win, and sees the data through that filter to begin with... Along with doing dishonest things like calling clear Democratic states swing states in order to support his view of the numbers. For this reason he could just be "wrong".
-
-
11-03-12, 01:56 PM #84
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
You know, I gotta hand it to you Laz, you have had the same narrative all along. You haven't wavered since you first called a landslide, and now that polls show this race in a dead heat (a far cry from the overwhemling advantage Obama had when you first called it a win for Romney), you very well could not only see a victory for Romney, but a landslide as well.
If the polls are so close in those battleground states, one, or all of them could go to Romney. I think its safe to say it'll be a toss up, but still.
I got to hand it to you, you have defended your points several times with some pretty solid reasoning. It may not be solid to those who only see smoking guns, and dead bodies as "concrete", but you have presented enough that a reasonable person would need to consider it.
I still think Obama is going to win by the narrowest of margins, but I continue to hope I'm wrong.
Just remember Laz, those who attack you, call you names, and insult your intelligence don't want to see Romney win because that would mean you, with all your "insane ramblings", knew more about this scenario than they did. That's where the animosity comes from.
Anyway...
And now this:
Beatin' Barack - Obama wanking toy - YouTube~BigTymer~ liked this post
-
11-03-12, 02:16 PM #85
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
Creationists think the same way. Disregard all evidence, cherry-pick what you think supports your view, and make statements that conflict with the body of evidence you do have. Not one other person in this whole forum sees what he does, so I don't think he's done enough to make reasonable people even consider his view.
Creationists, 9/11 truthers, birthers, poll truthers, and all other conspiracy theorists and science-deniers aren't fans of evidence and data. They are pretty much holding on to wishful thinking at this point in time. Sometimes that wishful thinking comes true, but a majority of the time it doesn't.
Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking.
Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the race is “too close to call.” It isn’t. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you can’t acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.
But the state polls may not be right. They could be biased. Based on the historical reliability of polls, we put the chance that they will be biased enough to elect Mr. Romney at 16 percent.
-
11-03-12, 02:23 PM #86
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
But you don't say how the picture gets skewed. Unless the label figures in to how he does his calculations, then it's just a label. He could call Michigan a LOSER state, or say that Wisconsin was part of the Blocque Du Fromage; but unless he has some special cheese-biased algorithm, what does it matter?
So then why are we even having this conversation? You keep going on about things like "valid statistical analysis", but you haven't said what part of his analysis is invalid. If you don't think polls are useful, then that's fine with me.
I can't tell what you're saying... where is the cherry-picking? The polls he used as examples were ones where the result was very different from what we'd expect. The examples went both ways.
You use that word a lot, and in ways that don't quite make sense to me. I think I've passed some sort of event horizon where the density of the word "liberal" has become large enough to warp space-thought.
So I might be done.
Cheers,
AetheLoveLast edited by AetheLove; 11-03-12 at 02:26 PM.
-
11-03-12, 02:44 PM #87
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
You're confusing your beliefs, and mine with a certain admiration I have for someone who can stick to their guns even when no one agrees with him. That doesn't make him wrong for defending his viewpoint, any more than defending your viewpoint does for you.
Just know, that as crazy and out of touch he seems to you, you seem that way to most of the rest of us, just on the other side of the spectrum.
-
11-03-12, 04:28 PM #88Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
I've always maintained that I don't know who will win, even when Obama was leading by a large margin. Lazarus is like a gambler who thinks that he knows the secret to the next dice roll. That gambler might occasionally be correct (especially when his odds are 50%), but that doesn't make his means of arriving at that answer sound.
-
11-03-12, 05:53 PM #89
Re: LANDSLIDE? Hidden Vote?
Sticking to your beliefs is one thing, sticking to your beliefs when they fly in the face of the evidence is another. For instance, I believe Obama will be a far better President than Romney ever could hope to be, but I don't believe he is going to win because of that. I believe he is going to win because the polling data shows he is going to win. If it showed Romney ahead, my belief that Obama was the better option would remain but I wouldn't believe Obama was going to win. That's where the fundamental disconnect comes in.
So it's not admirable to hold a belief that flies in the face of the evidence. That's how we get creationists and conspiracy theorists, and I don't think you'd say that those positions are admirable. If I'm wrong, it's because all the pollsters were wrong. Every single one of them. And that's a small possibility, I suppose, but not one I'm willing to bet on. If Laz is wrong, what's his reasoning?
Hey, that's fine. You can see me however you want, but I don't base my views on made-up wishes and feelings. I have data that supports what I believe and why. I'm not asking you to ever agree with my evidence or my conclusions, but there does come a time when the evidence is pretty conclusive one way or the other and it becomes foolish to deny it. That's when I think it becomes crazy and out-of-touch.
-
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks