United States Presidential Election 2008 - Official Discussion Thread

Originally posted by sithsaber408
And rueters, and NBC, and...etc... blah,.blah...

Basically any poll that shows McCain leading/Obama losing ground isn't one to listen to.

I get it.

It's more like you're ignoring everything that says Obama is in the clear lead and reverting back to your one poll as if it is proof of anything, which, being a poll, isn't.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
And rueters, and NBC, and...etc... blah,.blah...

Basically any poll that shows McCain leading/Obama losing ground isn't one to listen to.

I get it.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Reuters is a British press agency, why on earth would they do polling for the US presidential election?

Originally posted by lord xyz
538 and CQ aren't polls you tard, they're projections using electoral college and the most recent polls in one state alone. If they did a Gallup poll in November 2000, it'd say Gore won, as Strangelove pointed out.

It's more like you're ignoring everything that says Obama is in the clear lead and reverting back to your one poll as if it is proof of anything, which, being a poll, isn't.

528 uses polls, "tard".

And I'm not ignoring anything. Look at what Bardock posted. 10 polls, from CNN, to USA today, ABC, etc...

1 shows McCain winning by 5 points, 1 shows a tie, and 8 show Obama winning, but by 4 points at the most. Mostly by 3.

Obama is barely holding a slim lead, and in some cases is tied or losing. There are no polls where "Obama is in the clear lead."

All this boils down to is Obama supporters not liking where things are at the moment.

Both you and Strangelove have so assured yourelves of a democratic victory that you can't concieve of McCain actually having good experience, ideas, and policies, and him doing well to communicate them.

Again, I'm not saying he's gonna win. But the blindness displayed is pretty funny here.

Edit

Originally posted by sithsaber408
528 uses polls, "tard".

And I'm not ignoring anything. Look at what Bardock posted. 10 polls, from CNN, to USA today, ABC, etc...

1 shows McCain winning by 5 points, 1 shows a tie, and 8 show Obama winning, but by 4 points at the most. Mostly by 3.

Obama is barely holding a slim lead, and in some cases is tied or losing. There are no polls where "Obama is in the clear lead."

All this boils down to is Obama supporters not liking where things are at the moment.

Both you and Strangelove have so assured yourelves of a democratic victory that you can't concieve of McCain actually having good experience, ideas, and policies, and him doing well to communicate them.

Again, I'm not saying he's gonna win. But the blindness displayed is pretty funny here.

He's holding a lead, no matter how you phrase it.

Any proof to back up that it's because they don't like Bush? McCain is not Bush, but he doesn't promise anything the public wants, just the whole "Obama is terrorist lol".

That's because he's a senile old coot, who thinks Czechoslovakia is still a coutry and that Vietnamese are to be formally known as "gooks".

Yeah, the blindness display is funny.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Probably cause they are a press agency.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
528 uses polls, "tard".

And I'm not ignoring anything. Look at what Bardock posted. 10 polls, from CNN, to USA today, ABC, etc...

1 shows McCain winning by 5 points, 1 shows a tie, and 8 show Obama winning, but by 4 points at the most. Mostly by 3.

Obama is barely holding a slim lead, and in some cases is tied or losing. There are no polls where "Obama is in the clear lead."

All this boils down to is Obama supporters not liking where things are at the moment.

Both you and Strangelove have so assured yourelves of a democratic victory that you can't concieve of McCain actually having good experience, ideas, and policies, and him doing well to communicate them.

Again, I'm not saying he's gonna win. But the blindness displayed is pretty funny here.

I'm not the one who's predicting a big victory and saying it's "in the bag", xyz is. Don't accuse me of being blind, I see exactly what's going on, and I try to be as dispassionate as I can.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Reuters publishes polls, but they don't conduct them.

I think they "conduct" a joint poll with Zogby.

Originally posted by Strangelove
Reuters publishes polls, but they don't conduct them. Using polls to make predictions and conducting polls are two different things. 538 compiles all the current polls and then weights them relative to the agency's reliability. For instance, Zogby Interactive, the polling agency that gave McCain that +5 in the link, is a notoriously unreliable agency.

I'm not the one who's predicting a big victory and saying it's "in the bag", xyz is. Don't accuse me of being blind, I see exactly what's going on, and I try to be as dispassionate as I can.

My apologies. You are pretty good at showing not showing partiality.

And thanks for the information on Zogby. I'd rather not have anything to brag about than to brag about something that's erroneous.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think they "conduct" a joint poll with Zogby.

Except Mrs. Obama delivered an excellent speach at the convention.

Wakey Wakey 😱

Don´t tell you you fall for this sort of prepared, pre written by a bunch of experts, acted speech. She and other political tools should get Oscars for their performances sometimes.

Notice the key words, the mention of key players, key brainwashing phrases 😱 Its SOO obviously BULLSHIT its unbelievable

When politicians start actually doing something instead of waffling a load of crap with false crowds cheering and screaming in the background then I will be impressed.

Originally posted by Devil King
Except Mrs. Obama delivered an excellent speach at the convention.

I second that. She humanized him. (and herself, as well). She came across as strong yet soft. Meaning she delivered aggressive messages in a comforting voice. To me she seem too unnaturally melodramatic towards the end with the breathing but she did well over all, but still. I still think Barack’s profoundly inexperienced. And that's just for the role. If he wins he’ll be inheriting almost a decade worth of W. Bush’s mess. A job I think that would be extremely tough even for the most experienced politician there let a lone a junior senator with less than 5 years of senatorial experience.

Bush is an idiot. But at least he's had some solid experience with great exposure to vast amounts of politics when he wasn't under the influence. He was a Governor, his father was a U.S. president and vice president to Regan, his brother was a Governor. And with all that he still managed to mess up. What will a junior senator with a hope slogan do? We don’t need hope. Hope’s for fools. Imagine the crisis this country’s going through but 5-10 worse. But I digress. (got a bit off track) I give her speech a 9/10.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Wakey Wakey 😱

Don´t tell you you fall for this sort of prepared, pre written by a bunch of experts, acted speech. She and other political tools should get Oscars for their performances sometimes.

Notice the key words, the mention of key players, key brainwashing phrases 😱 Its SOO obviously BULLSHIT its unbelievable

When politicians start actually doing something instead of waffling a load of crap with false crowds cheering and screaming in the background then I will be impressed.

Originally posted by Strangelove
The idea that speeches are occasionally written by speechwriters is a revelation only to you, I'm afraid.

I couldn't help but think of the situation we are in as a country during Pelosi's speech at the DNC last night.

The Republican party has completely lost their way and strayed from the roots of their original party platform. Republicans and conservatives are no longer synomnous. And if I'm an American, I definitely don't want twelve straight years of Republicans in the White House (eight of Bush plus a possible four of McCain -- granted McCain seems better on domestic spending).

But then you look at the Democrats and what they have become. They've changed over the years quite a bit. They've pretty much copyrighted the 'anti-Iraq war' sentiment even though they haven't done crap with it. They were elected mostly in 2006 in Congress to make change and instead, have been the worse Congresses in recent memory with a very poor approval rating. Plus, I think the policies they are pushing are ridiculously absurd. But we are thinking of putting one of them in office for four to possibly eight years.

If McCain gets into office, he probably won't get crap done because of the Democrats taking over Congress more and more. And if Obama gets into office, I don't see him living up to all the stuff he has been talking about with regards to putting America on a better path because as I've stated before, I believe the shit is going to hit the fan big time regardless of who is President because of Bush and what he did.

So long story 'long', either way you look at it, I think we are ****ed.

According to daily tracking poll at Gallup McCain is up: 46% to Obama's 44%. (RCP has Obama up by one point, 45-44)

It will be interesting to see how much of a bounce the convention gives Obama.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
When politicians start actually doing something instead of waffling a load of crap with false crowds cheering and screaming in the background then I will be impressed.

I'm fairly certain politicians do things, political things, maybe not what you'd personally like them to do, but there it is.

"False crowds"?

I would wager Obama is a sure win in this election, and rightfully so due to Bush falling so far out of wack with Republican principles and then getting McCain nominated who again doesnt seem to represent a true Republican. The Democrats did completely tank the last 2 elections, so I wouldnt be surprised if they somehow drop the ball in this one too. OBama/McCain..either way we are going to lose this election.

What are these "Republican principles" that Bush (and McCain) fails to follow?