WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now closed)


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby cullman » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:40 pm

mcgato wrote:
Friar wrote:~ The dislike for Nate Silver eludes me? The man is a technician not a Dick Morris.
I may have missed it, but did someone say anything bad about Silver? He has been spot on so far tonight.

He uses math and proper statistical analysis to come up with his results. Oh...and the torches and pitch forks were brought out after he predicted a win for Obama.

cman
cullman
 
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: ...in training...for something...

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby cullman » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:46 pm

Flumpy wrote:
gh wrote:
Flumpy wrote:And the rest of the world...........

http://madisonproject.com/wp-content/up ... 102012.gif



errr, Flump... ain't it like 0-dark-30 where you are?


What's 0-dark-30??? :?

12:30 AM :lol:
cullman
 
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: ...in training...for something...

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mcgato » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:49 pm

cullman wrote:He uses math and proper statistical analysis to come up with his results. Oh...and the torches and pitch forks were brought out after he predicted a win for Obama.

cman
As a statistician, I really like his work. As a fellow U of Chicago alum, I really like his work. But the bottom line, he does really good work on the predictions. Crazy good work.
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby gh » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:50 pm

cullman wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
gh wrote:
Flumpy wrote:And the rest of the world...........

http://madisonproject.com/wp-content/up ... 102012.gif



errr, Flump... ain't it like 0-dark-30 where you are?


What's 0-dark-30??? :?

12:30 AM :lol:


Actually, in my experience, it's usually reserved for small-number 30s, like 01 through 05 (06:30 being a perfectly logical time at which to be up)
gh
 
Posts: 46327
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:51 pm

cullman wrote:
Flumpy wrote:
gh wrote:
Flumpy wrote:And the rest of the world...........

http://madisonproject.com/wp-content/up ... 102012.gif



errr, Flump... ain't it like 0-dark-30 where you are?


What's 0-dark-30??? :?

12:30 AM :lol:


I wish, it's 02.50 am but i had a little snooze at 8pm so i have stamina to last out the whole night :D
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:52 pm

It's actually 2.50am here.

I shall be up until we get a result. Hoping that's not sometime in December.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby dj » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:55 pm

Friar wrote:~ The dislike for Nate Silver eludes me? The man is a technician not a Dick Morris.


Watch the movie "Moneyball." Silver is the movie's young computer nerd; the pundits are the movie's scouts.

It's tech and math versus eyes and intuition.

The analogy works well as Silver was a major baseball stat person (creator of PECOTA, a performance prediction model) before moving to politics.
dj
 
Posts: 6199
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:56 pm

CNN have the best results but BBC have the best discussion :? i'm flicking between the 2. I'm going to switch to Fox in a minute just for a laugh, the more panicked they get the more preposterous they become :lol: :lol:
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:00 pm

There was lots of talk about a lack of enthusiasm for Obama but there seems to have been a massive turnout in many swing states.

I assume this is good for Obama

Romney gets Utah thought :shock: :wink:
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:04 pm

Come on Dade County!!!
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby gh » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:07 pm

Flumpy wrote:It's actually 2.50am here.

I shall be up until we get a result. Hoping that's not sometime in December.


May depend on what Mr. H. Chad did in Florida :-)
gh
 
Posts: 46327
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:08 pm

For those of you who haven't seen it, this is one of my all-time favorite youtube videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjrthOPLAKM

She must live in Ohio.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby JRM » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:13 pm

McCaskill defeats Akin; Donnelly defeats Mourdock. Apparently, rape isn't taken quite as lightly as some thought.
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Marlow » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:13 pm

gh wrote:Actually, in my experience, it's usually reserved for small-number 30s, like 01 through 05 (06:30 being a perfectly logical time at which to be up)

It's a military term, having nothing to do with being on the half hour - simply meaning an 'ungodly early' time to have to get up for a take-off on a mission or get up for maneuvers. Therefore it doesn't refer to a time between midnight and 3am, which presumably would just be a very long extended previous day. That leaves about 3am to about 5am.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:15 pm

Flumpy wrote:But the racial demographics point towards a Democratic majority in the future. Unless the GOP start to make huge inroads into the Hispanic and Black vote they are doomed

Amen! In 1980, Reagna got 55% of the White vote. In 2008 McCain also got 55% of the White vote. The difference is that Whites comprised 90% of the electorate in 1980 versus 74% in 2008.

Demographics is destiny.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:16 pm

CNN: Dems hold the Senate :D
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:17 pm

The guy with the map on CNN is MAZE

the detail is unbelievable :D
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby DrJay » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:19 pm

On FOX, Sarah Palin said "It's a perplexing time for us..." if things continue likely the early trends are showing. What's so perplexing about losing, about the electorate voting for the other guy's platform? When that happens, you lost. Pretty simple.
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:22 pm

JRM wrote:McCaskill defeats Akin; Donnelly defeats Mourdock. Apparently, rape isn't taken quite as lightly as some thought.

I disagree with both Akin and Mourdock, but IMO Mourdock didn't come across as a knuckle-dragging neanderthal like Akin did. If you are one of those folks who believes that unborn fetuses are equal to newborn enfants, and therefore should be afforded the same rights, it's logically incoherent to say that it's wrong to murder fetuses if they're the product of consensual sex between unrelated adults, but okay to murder these fetuses if they were concieved under other circumstances.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:24 pm

Lot's of things are perplexing to Sarah Palin.

This whole thing is really heartening so far. You Americans get a really bad press mostly because of the extremely loud voices on the right wing of your political spectrum.

It seems that they may be far more vocal than they are popular.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:26 pm

Flumpy wrote:Lot's of things are perplexing to Sarah Palin.

This whole thing is really heartening so far. You Americans get a really bad press mostly because of the extremely loud voices on the right wing of your political spectrum.

It seems that they may be far more vocal than they are popular.

Have you seen the movie Game Change?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:27 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
JRM wrote:McCaskill defeats Akin; Donnelly defeats Mourdock. Apparently, rape isn't taken quite as lightly as some thought.

I disagree with both Akin and Mourdock, but IMO Mourdock didn't come across as a knuckle-dragging neanderthal like Akin did. If you are one of those folks who believes that unborn fetuses are equal to newborn enfants, and therefore should be afforded the same rights, it's logically incoherent to say that it's wrong to murder fetuses if they're the product of consensual sex between unrelated adults, but okay to murder these fetuses if they were concieved under other circumstances.


That may be what he meant but what is sounded like was that rape was gods intention and when you're a US right-winger you have to be very careful how you phrase things, because your track recored (and your colleagues) proceed you :?
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:29 pm

Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby dj » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:33 pm

A very good polling site is http://www.electoral-vote.com/

You can no longer see the original electoral map at the close of pre-election polls yesterday, but if you move to the tipping-point page (http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/P ... erage.html) you can see their composite poll on voting percentages within each state.

Right now the most surprising swing would be if Virginia were to go for Romney, which doesn't seem likely.
dj
 
Posts: 6199
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby guru » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:33 pm

Anybody watching ABC? Diane Sawyer seems a bit less than fully sober lol
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby kuha » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:34 pm

mump boy wrote:Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:


They are a complete joke--nothing but a propaganda organization. They've been flogging the non-issue of voter fraud for months while ignoring the very real Republican efforts to suppress the vote. I smell some poetic justice in the air.
kuha
 
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:36 pm

kuha wrote:
mump boy wrote:Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:


They are a complete joke--nothing but a propaganda organization. They've been flogging the non-issue of voter fraud for months while ignoring the very real Republican efforts to suppress the vote. I smell some poetic justice in the air.


That's why I'm watching he desperation is hilarious. They have Karl Rove trying to stay positive :lol:
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:42 pm

jazzcyclist wrote:
Flumpy wrote:Lot's of things are perplexing to Sarah Palin.

This whole thing is really heartening so far. You Americans get a really bad press mostly because of the extremely loud voices on the right wing of your political spectrum.

It seems that they may be far more vocal than they are popular.

Have you seen the movie Game Change?


I have indeed. Read the book as well.

Twas amazing and actually quite sympathetic to Palin.

Julianne Moore was fantabulous.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby kuha » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:42 pm

mump boy wrote:
kuha wrote:
mump boy wrote:Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:


They are a complete joke--nothing but a propaganda organization. They've been flogging the non-issue of voter fraud for months while ignoring the very real Republican efforts to suppress the vote. I smell some poetic justice in the air.


That's why I'm watching he desperation is hilarious. They have Karl Rove trying to stay positive :lol:


And I say good for him. It might build some character. At present he has none.
kuha
 
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:45 pm

mump boy wrote:Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:


At least they're not calling Florida early.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:48 pm

mump boy wrote:
kuha wrote:
mump boy wrote:Fox is amazing

they're reporting ILLEGAL VOTING in Ohio :shock:


They are a complete joke--nothing but a propaganda organization. They've been flogging the non-issue of voter fraud for months while ignoring the very real Republican efforts to suppress the vote. I smell some poetic justice in the air.


That's why I'm watching he desperation is hilarious. They have Karl Rove trying to stay positive :lol:


They've just suggested that Obama is slightly leading in Florida but the Panhandle is still to come in and that tends to lean right. It also only has about 3 people living there as opposed to the millions down south that are definite Dems.

Even they don't believe this rubbish.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:50 pm

Flumpy wrote:I have indeed. Read the book as well.

Twas amazing and actually quite sympathetic to Palin.

Julianne Moore was fantabulous.

What was scary was hearing Steve Schmidt and Nicolle Wallace declare that the movie's producers took no artistic license at all after that had a chance to review it. Schmidt said that at certain parts of the movie he cringed because they were using the verbatim transcript of actual conversation that took place during the campaign.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby JRM » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:58 pm

Flumpy wrote:Even they don't believe this rubbish.


They're trying to drag this out as much as possible.... but it's wearing thin.

I say: it's over. Four more years!
JRM
 
Posts: 2625
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Woodland Hills, CA

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Daisy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:58 pm

JRM wrote:McCaskill defeats Akin; Donnelly defeats Mourdock. Apparently, rape isn't taken quite as lightly as some thought.

Except they still got a healthy chunk of the vote.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby BillVol » Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:59 pm

IMO the only significant difference between the two is who each would nominate for court positions, especially Supreme Court. Other than that, no real difference to the average American.
BillVol
 
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Chattanooga

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:07 pm

JRM wrote:
Flumpy wrote:Even they don't believe this rubbish.


They're trying to drag this out as much as possible.... but it's wearing thin.

I say: it's over. Four more years!


They'll probably declare Florida for Romney in a minute :lol:
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby mump boy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:09 pm

BillVol wrote:IMO the only significant difference between the two is who each would nominate for court positions, especially Supreme Court. Other than that, no real difference to the average American.


Not on health care ?
mump boy
 
Posts: 5636
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: saaaaaarf london

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby kuha » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:09 pm

BillVol wrote:IMO the only significant difference between the two is who each would nominate for court positions, especially Supreme Court. Other than that, no real difference to the average American.


SOME things will be the same no matter what, but there are VERY major differences between the two candidates.
kuha
 
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby jazzcyclist » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:09 pm

BillVol wrote:IMO the only significant difference between the two is who each would nominate for court positions, especially Supreme Court. Other than that, no real difference to the average American.

Based on the foreign policy advisors Romney has surrounded himself with, I think there's a much greater chance of us going to war with Iran if he gets elected.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE ELECTION? (now open)

Postby Flumpy » Tue Nov 06, 2012 8:11 pm

BillVol wrote:IMO the only significant difference between the two is who each would nominate for court positions, especially Supreme Court. Other than that, no real difference to the average American.


But surely you know Obama is going to drive the counry to ruin as he's a Muslim communist?
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests