Let's put it like this: if Romney wins, there will be a record increase in the unemployment rate due to the collapse of the polling industry. :p
Printable View
Let's put it like this: if Romney wins, there will be a record increase in the unemployment rate due to the collapse of the polling industry. :p
Not sure its about ratings, I've not seen many Stateside (non-partisan) pundits calling it early as a clear Obama win either. I think its more about journalists being cautious and not wanting to get it wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
They're doing it for the same reason. No one's going to watch election coverage if they're told it's not a close race.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Maybe they don't want to dishearten people who haven't voted yet.
Actually possibly the opposite, after the polling industry got the '92 election here so catastrophically wrong then a probably record amount was spent on it investigating what went wrong/developing new techniques etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
If trust in polls goes down, I'm willing to bet that news agencies will be far less willing to spend big bucks to get frequent polls.
Then they should stop projecting any results until all the polling stations are closed (which wouldn't be the worst idea).Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Again the opposite ... if all the poll companies can get it right so easily then what's the point in spending big bucks on your specific one? If on the other hand you can try and claim that you've got the only accurate one ...
Have you got any evidence backing your intuition?
Each of the news agencies have statistics/polling experts. Those experts are almost unanimous in saying this will not be a close race. Those analysts get little if any face time. The NY Times seems to be the only one not clamoring to say what a close race this is, and they're only major news source to let a stats/polling person lead their election coverage.
Romney's leading by 3 electoral votes right now.
I'm ready to call it. Obama with 300ish electoral votes.
Popular vote is a tough call, though.
Good piece, but I don't buy their counter-argument. They might get a brownie point by "being different", but if people go to sleep at 11 PM, what's going to happen to their ratings after that?Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
Agreed. But I do think they at least provide a decent discussion on the whys of this phenomenon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
That being said, don't you think people still care about more than just the presidential election tonight? I know the only reason I have the TV on in the background is the Warren/Brown race, not the presidential one. They can capitalize on local races even if they argue that the presidential race is all but decided.
I'm not sure how much people care about the local races. They might check the results every once in a while, but they're not going to keep the channel on all night to see who wins.
Looks like Warren might take it by the way. Commies. :(
It must be all of those weed-lovers coming out to vote who assured her victory. :o
That was Brown's mistake. He should have given out some free weed the day before the election...
Looks like its all over bar the counting, the President's been re-elected and I'm off to bed soon ...
All the places I'm watching are still showing Romney as up.
But yeah, go to bed. The result was never really in doubt.
My prediction would be 100% accurate if Romney won the last 3 states. Unfortunately, he's not nice enough to do that. :o
For all the anti-poll people: it looks like 538 predicted all 50 states.
I predict Obama will win in the electoral college, with a very narrow win on the popular vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
If Florida goes to Romney, I was right! :p
It won't. :p
2020 is gonna be hella weird I think. Nate Silver may have to be locked up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Republicans have to figure out that they NEED to get away from the social issues, and focus on smaller government/fiscal responsibility to have any hope.
Unfortunately, if they did that, some other party would arise to take their place (or more likely, the party would splinter).
On an unrelated note, it seems that the irresponsible election coverage that claimed the race was nearly a tie until the last second is fueling conspiracy theorists. Good job, self-serving journalists.
Creative destruction is needed.
Institutions aren't in the business of intentionally destroying themselves.
So what's the final consensus about professional polls? There's been a lot of back-and-forth about using polls to make predictions -- voter turn-out, winning undecideds, whether the race was "close" or a "landslide" -- and which polls were objective or partisan.
Some Republicans seemed downright shocked at exit polls showing Obama ahead, and refused to believe them. Donald Trump aside, I heard Fox News even delayed calling it for Obama after other news agencies did, because Karl Rove didn't trust the data coming out of Ohio. If that's true, it's a pretty sad future for (R) strategists and campaign leaders. :weird:
Polls aren't "partisan". They're either done well or they're not.
Well, and stop making any and every minority feel like the GOP wants to kick them in the shins and stick its tongue out at them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veldan Rath
In general... what minorities are the GOP against?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
From a policy approach I could see gays being a little put out.
Republicans are the party that wants to end racial discrimination while Democrats want to codify it in law.
Gays, Hispanics, women (not really a minority I suppose), atheists/agnostics, and Muslims. If you want to use a broader definition of minority, then scientists, internationalists, and anyone who's not obsessed with never raising taxes or personally saving the "life" of every fetus.
This is why they lost me. I've voted Republican in every election but this one (I didn't vote in 2010 because my kid was sick that day, bad excuse I know, but I would have voted R then too). I'd like to come back to the party, because I am a fiscal conservative. But their social positions were something I couldn't swallow. They've lost their small government status when they try to make federal laws restricting equal rights. Economic policies come and go, but making laws regarding social issues seem to take longer to reverse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Veldan Rath
If you want to broaden the definition of minority then everyone is a minority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Women is not minority - if they were then so would men and minority would lose all purpose as a word.
You seem to think that taxes (already too high in the modern world) and abortion are the only two issues for the GOP.
Second amendment (guns for those not versed in American politics)
Less regulation (sorry government - you don't get to change the temperature of my house!)
Less regulation (sorry government I can buy/sell any size soft drink!)
Less government take over (sorry government eminent domain for the purpose of a broader tax basis should be OK).
Secret ballots.
Protection against frivolous law suits.
Drilling.
National Defense.
Debt/Deficits (I am aware of the track record... but liberals hardly even pay lip service).
Putting and keeping violent thugs behind bars.
School vouchers.
Lots of issues that Republicans run.
In regards to other minorities - why would someone who is here legally and Hispanic not be in favor of ending discrimination? Wouldn't they be in favor of outlawing discriminatory practices in academia?
Muslims - not seeing the issue? Has the GOP put forth legislation to treat them like 2nd class citizens? Or are you suggesting that all Muslims dislike American foreign policy if it helps Israel? Cus that's pretty wrong.
Atheists/agnostics - meh. Republicans and Democrats are religious by and large. Republicans don't want to require religious base laws - they just don't think the 1st amendment means freedom from religion. To me only the folks with chips on their shoulders that cry about manger scenes and what not are impacted. I do see GOP as being in favor of more traditional values but there are plenty of libertarian non religious folks who side way more with Republicans then Democrats.
The fact that the GOP continues to piss off women, who are not a minority, is itself a signal of how unresponsive the party is to changing social norms. How is the GOP going to win elections when minorities make up a quarter of the voters (and rising)? Or when they lose the women vote by 10%?
And yes, the GOP stands for a lot of things, which is why it's stupid for it to piss off potential voters with some of its extremist stances.
A) Stop talking about contraception. Period. It's stupid and isn't a vote getter anywhere.
B) Stop emphasizing abortion (though it wouldn't hurt if the GOP accepted abortion in the first trimester). It's a net vote loser. It might get votes in the South, but the South is reliably Republican anyway.
C) Stop talking about gays. If the GOP wants to suck up to the traditionalist vote by maintaining its opposition to gay marriage, that's fine (from an electoral perspective). The problem is all the talk about gay agendas/conspiracies and homophobia in general. There are a lot of Americans who oppose gay marriage, but get turned off by bigotry.
D) Stop pandering to the lunatics with the opposition to Shari'a law in the US (a major threat to the US :rolleyes: ). Stop opposing the building of mosques; it's racist. Stop claiming the Palestinian people do not exist (even if the GOP supporters believe that) - all it does is piss people off.
E) Stop claiming that anyone who doesn't go to church is immoral/not American. The agnostic portion of the population is increasing, and there is absolutely no reason to piss off 10-20% of the population.
F) Stop taking a hardline on immigration reform. Regardless of the merits of the various proposals, taking an extreme position will have a devastating effect on the GOP's ability to win the Hispanic vote. You might think it's fair or unfair, but fairness isn't what gets parties elected. If the Republican leadership had a brain, they'd push for a partial amnesty (while forcing people to pay back-baxes) and force Obama and the Senate to accept or reject the proposal.
G) Stop being anti-science. It's damaging on many levels. First, anyone who cares about science is automatically being turned against the GOP. Even traditionally right-leaning professions/fields like economics and engineering are becoming Democratic due to the assault on science and science spending. And second, most people accept global warming and that percentage is increasing. The global warming denial does nothing but make the GOP look anachronistic, as well as pissing off environmentalists who in another era were reliable conservative voters.
H) Stop promoting an odd combination of isolationism and blindly antagonistic foreign policy. The GOP loses credibility when it refuses to have reasonable solutions to complex international problems. There's nothing wrong with talking to enemies or throwing them some carrots. You could always bomb them later.
I) Stop the obsession with no tax increases. High taxes are bad. Most people accept that. Cutting spending by $700 billion per year is just not feasible. By opposing all taxes, the GOP is supporting high deficits. Agree to a 25 (from taxes)/75 (from spending) split in cutting the deficit and most people will be happy.
J) Stop the obsession with ideological purity. No party is going to win 50% of the vote if it insists on booting out anyone who disagrees with any part of its platform. Allow for regional diversity. Don't try to force southern ideology on the rest of the country. What gets a Republican elected in Louisiana doesn't get a Republican elected in Indiana.
So yes, the GOP has plenty of policies that it should be lauded for, but they get drowned out by the idiocy mentioned above.
2nd and 3rd generation descendants of immigrants still frequently identify/empathize with immigrants and immigration issues. And there are vocal populations within the GOP that are very effective at alienating anyone like that. For example, anyone ranting about government forms or publications being provided in Spanish. Not that you'd grasp that since you're one of 'em.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Loki, for the first time in a long while I don't think I have a single complaint about something you wrote. This is the Republican Party I would like to see. Now if we could just get GGT to write a similar post about the Democratic Party...Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
A - What? All the GOP wants is to not to force business and religious institutions to do something they don't want to do. There are a tons of places to get contraception why the hell should something that is so readily available get special protection? If the church doesn't want to have a group insurance policy that covers birth control... so what?
B - You do know why the GOP dislikes abortion right? It has nothing to do with politics - it has everything to do with their view on life. If it hurts them electorally, fine. Sometimes principal should be stood up for.
C - Meh. I dislike the whole issue - government shouldn't weigh in on marriage at all. Wife/Husband should have no special tax advantages or disadvantages. So I'll give you that one.
D - Such a minor issue. Who is in favor of Shari'a law? Its a meaningless symbolic vote - one that nearly all Muslims living in this country wouldn't even have an issue with. As far as mosques that was just around ground zero and yeah that's retarded. But what's also retarded is calling that racist... Islam is not a race.
E - Again... what? I'm sure you can dig up some crazy nut railing about this in politics but no mainstream politician makes this an issue.
F - The last president who made a serious push for comprehensive immigration reform was Bush.
G - Anti-science? Don't be delusional. Climate change is by no means an exact science. The bias of some of the folks doing the research has now been well documented. The fact that only Republicans seem to care about intellectual property is telling when it comes to scientific innovation.
H - Neither party has been isolationist in a long long time. Republicans tend to be in favor of NATO. Republicans tend to be in favor of closer alliances with actual ideological allies. (Eastern Europe, Israel for example). And you're living in la la world if you think the first reaction the GOP has is to bomb shit. (I could only wish).
I - The historical record over the long turn is that taxes continue to go up and up and up. As moochers demand more and more resources from the collective politicians find ways to take it from the achievers. Putting your foot down on taxes will force cuts eventually. Its math. Give a bit on taxes... and it will be raised. 20 years late it will be raised again and then again and then again. I will say that not all tax increases would be bad - I'm a particular fan of making sure everyone pays a little something.
J - What? No one is forced out of the party. At best some moderates lose in the primaries against more conservative candidates. But the establishment almost always backs the incumbent. Unless you suggest not letting Republican voters vote in the primaries I don't see how you fix that... Republicans don't mandate ideological purity from their rank and file. As a party they tend to be more disciplined but this is a stretch.
I'm sorry Lewk, but I'm just not sure that's true. I know many Republicans who do want a religious baseline for laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Not learning English hurts far more immigrants then people not providing forms in multiple languages. Its beyond short sighted not to learn English in this country, its down right idiotic. Its also more of an out of the way gripe then a serious policy issue. As far as empathizing with illegals - I supposes that's a possibility but it would be a gigantic shot int he foot if Republicans supported amnesty. It encourages more illegal immigration and it gives Democrats even more voters.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
I'm sure there are some but mainstream conservatives don't go around demanding that people follow the first 4 commandments. It just doesn't happen. Gambling, Prostitution and other "sin" laws tend to be supported by Democrats almost as much. I'm sure some libertarians are on the left but most of them are on the right because they understand economic freedoms tend to be the most pressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch the Red