Re: 51-45/ Revised. 52-45/ Electoral Shift

archer wrote:

Heisenberg wrote:

archer wrote: Consistency has never been a Republican strong point, and Romney is a perfect example. There are 3 national polls that have Obama back up after losing ground to Romney, but our conservative friends aren't mentioning those.

Our "Republican friends" are individuals with individual opinions. Try to remember that.

That's pretty amusing coming from one of our conservative friends. Liberals here have endured being lumped into a stereotypical box by conservatives here, yet not one peep out of you. Spare me the feigned outrage.

Coming from the person who is always whining about people claiminng to know how you think... need some examples? Yet you have this consistent need to lump everyone on the right into one basket. Try to practice what you preach for once or don't biitch when people do it to you. And again, I can post many many exmples of your broad brush accusations. This is how racism works... not saying you are a racist but its the same pathetic tactic. You see some conservatives in the media or people on this forum saying something you disagree with, then you lump all conservatives together in your broad brush statements, as if YOU KNOW how we all think. If you want to get into this war, I have a ton of proof to support my position.

Here's some words you may find useful... some, many, a few, most, often, sometimes, the majority.

I'll take all those words into consideration as soon as your buddies here do likewise....and I have a ton of proof to support my position. You sure are spoiling for a fight,. You want to make an example out of me, fine......it has been attack archer all week. No problem,I can take it.....but if you are going to insinuate that I, or any other liberal here, behave worse than MANY of the conservatives on this board, then I know you have finally gone round the bend.

This thread was about polls....and I made the simple claim that there were 3 polls showing Obama in the l lead....for which I was asked for proof, which I gave. Then the insults began. If so many of your friends here get so angry when one lone liberal gives them bad news, maybe you all need to look in the mirror and see just what you are made of. Looks to me like a lot of hate and desire to hurt others.

You did it so it's OK with me yet it isn't really OK because the minute anyone attempts to use the same tactic she calls you on it.
There is a word for it. I will let you look it up.

This thread was about polls....and I made the simple claim that there were 3 polls showing Obama in the l lead....for which I was asked for proof, which I gave. Then the insults began.

archer wrote: Consistency has never been a Republican strong point, and Romney is a perfect example. There are 3 national polls that have Obama back up after losing ground to Romney, but our conservative friends aren't mentioning those.

When exactly did the insults begin???

Shhhhhhhhh! we better be quiet, the teacher's about to come back from her trip to the office and if she hears us squabbling we might loose our second recess.

for Heisenberg

Here are a few of your quotes:

Liberals avoid this topic like the plague... not sure why, it really helps tell the story of Obama's awesome foriegn policy.

the economy is different, the electorate is different... these debates are not held in a vacuum. But I guess if it gives these panicked liberals some confidence..

What better way to gather votes than to be surrounded by brain dead liberals who ask brain dead questions that are not even softballs, they are cotton balls.

Liberals would like people to believe that Republicans are just heartless scum,

where are the "some, many, a few, most, often, sometimes, the majority."?

towermonkey wrote:

This thread was about polls....and I made the simple claim that there were 3 polls showing Obama in the l lead....for which I was asked for proof, which I gave. Then the insults began.

archer wrote: Consistency has never been a Republican strong point, and Romney is a perfect example. There are 3 national polls that have Obama back up after losing ground to Romney, but our conservative friends aren't mentioning those.

When exactly did the insults begin???

Years ago....

Anxiously awaiting Heisenberg's examples.

Happy to help with the research.

archer wrote: This thread was about polls....and I made the simple claim that there were 3 polls showing Obama in the l lead....for which I was asked for proof, which I gave. Then the insults began. If so many of your friends here get so angry when one lone liberal gives them bad news, maybe you all need to look in the mirror and see just what you are made of. Looks to me like a lot of hate and desire to hurt others.

Indeed they are, so let's talk about them for a moment.

archer wrote: IBD/TIPP Tracking Obama +2
ABC News/Wash Post Obama +3
Politico Obama +1

Go to Realclearpolitics.com....they are listed there

Indeed they are, but there is a 7-9 point difference between those polls and the Gallup Poll which covers those same periods which shows Romney up by 6. The Gallup poll sampled nearly as many voters as all three of the polls you noted combined and has a smaller margin of error than any of the polls you reference. We'll also note that in all of those polls the supposed Obama advantage lies within the margin of error of the poll while the Gallup poll showing a Romney advantage is well outside the polls margin of error.

And then we have the statistical weighting issue of using an outlying election with regards to participation rates. Tell me archer, do you think that the 18-29 voting block will favor Obama 2:1 in 2012 as it did in 2008 and that this age group will represent 18% or more of the votes cast? Do you think we will see 130 million total votes cast again this year? And if you do think that 130 million votes are going to be cast, do you think that they will mirror the enthusiastic support for Obama that they did in 2008?

When you look at the RCP Electoral College Map Romney leads for the first time 206-201 with 131 Toss Ups. It shows a 2 point Obama advantage in Wisconsin, a State that Obama won by double digits four short years ago. Virginia is trending Romney, a State that Obama won by over 6% in 2008. In Ohio, a State that favored Obama by nearly 5 points in 2008, the perceived Obama advantage is inside the margin of error of every poll. Colorado is trending Romney, a State that Obama won by 9 points in 2008.

There is a very real possibility that the 2012 Electoral Map will be closer to the 2004 Map than the 2008 one. Even if Obama should win, it will be with less support than he received in 2008. That would mean that he would be the only president to be reelected with a smaller margin of victory than when he was first elected since the end of WWII. Even George W Bush garnered more support in his reelection bid than he did when first elected. Do you really think under that set of circumstances he could be more effective as a lame duck than he was during his 1st term?

All duly noted...I think I will go with many of the conservatives on this one...the only poll that counts is on election day. Of course I am concerned about Romney's rise in the polls.....as I am sure you will be if he starts to drop in the polls....you can drive yourself crazy if poll watching is all you do. But there are some positives for Obama, and the electoral count with no toss up states hasn't changed all that much....Obama 294/ Romney 244.....