StarDestroyer.Net BBS

CmdrWilkens wrote:

JLTucker wrote:I'm sorry, but elections are more important than some dumbshit sports game.

Not neccessarily to programmers. All things aside if they didn't see money or influence at the bottom line they wouldn't do this. Advertising time in the World Series may not be quite the pemium of other events but its damn high. Shifting the start time even 10 minutes later puts a lot of ads out of circulation which means less money to the network. there is another loss in revenue since Obama, by virtue of this being political advertisement, is allowed to purchase at a much lower typical weekday rate on the same airtime. So in other words MLB (which won't see adime out of this deal) and FOX (who stand to lose money) did this anyway. it may make sense to us from a "good citizen" standpoint but that doesn't sell to the corporate line so you can bet money that this is only because folks at both of those groups already smell President Obama and would rather not piss him off.

I doubt that. It actually makes a fair amount of corporate sense. World Series is unlikely to go 6 games, so this promises then revenue no matter what.

Metatwaddle wrote:At any rate, nothing I've seen so far explains why granola-eating Oregon has so frequently been listed as a toss-up. I know they have idiotic hicks in the east, but AFAIK it's so sparsely populated that they just don't matter very much. You might as well list Delaware as a toss-up because we've got rednecks in the lower two-thirds of the state.

It's not just Eastern Oregon. The Willamette Valley (which is a strip of land in NW Oregon) tends to be more liberal than average in the US, but there's a lot of farmland in the valley and there are a lot of rural towns that surround the suburban and urban areas of Oregon. Additionally, even our biggest cities aren't big at all compared to other major metropolises, and there is a conservative element even in the cities and suburbs (although obviously much stronger in the countryside) that does not at all like the idea of voting for Democrats.

Kerry only won Oregon by 4%. Gore only won Oregon by less than one percent. Oregon has not been a guaranteed win for Democrats running for the Presidency in the past, and before 1988 it had not voted for a Democrat nominee since LBJ. Historically, it has been a battleground, and if things weren't heading for hell in a handbasket it would probably not have been quite so solidly pro-Obama, although it would probably still have gone for him at election time.

Well, I finally feel comfortable to say that should the status quo be maintained, McCain is without a doubt going to lose. I was listening to a woman on NPR say how McCain just comes off so angry and how it was heavily affecting her opinion of him, despite her wanting to vote Republican. I can only imagine that there is a sizable portion of the country that feels the same way and any further negative attack ads from the McCain campaign will only do McCain further harm. The only way McCain is going to win now is if bin Laden comes out with a video tape praising Obama. The bin Laden tape in 2004 undoubtedly gave Bush just enough percentages to shift the tide in a few key states.

One of the great questions lingering on everyone's mind at present is what the Obama campaign's September fundraising haul was. Well, according to here:

*** Is this why Obama opted out of public funds? But just like at the vice-presidential debate when we also learned that day that Team McCain was retreating from Michigan, the biggest news yesterday in the presidential race might have come before the debate even started. Interviewed on MSNBC, Obama strategist David Axelrod revealed that 4 million individuals have now donated to the Obama camp. That’s up from 2.5 million last month, meaning -- if our math is correct -- that 1.5 million new people gave money to Obama.

In addition, it has been rumored that the number is supposed to be huge:

One official close to the campaign said that September's fundraising haul set a new record, surpassing the $66 million Obama raised in August. Another aide, asked about the campaign's take, would only describe it: "big."

If past trends hold where the average donor donates approximately $100 and with 1.5 million new donors, the Obama campaign's September haul could conceivably reach $150 million. That would certainly be incredible.

I don't want to bust into panic this time.

The usual suspects on pollster.com claim the whole day that since the national tracking polls have tightened a bit, that McCain gains from the debate, and the most delusional ones even see a McCain surge.

However, in the state polls, he actually loses. So what the hell is going on?

Tribun wrote:I don't want to bust into panic this time.

The usual suspects on pollster.com claim the whole day that since the national tracking polls have tightened a bit, that McCain gains from the debate, and the most delusional ones even see a McCain surge.

However, in the state polls, he actually loses. So what the hell is going on?

Goddammit, will you stop with this? They're all relying on Zogby, who push-polls to get the answers he wants.

Ghetto edit:









This is the only poll that shows it within the margin of error. Do you trust this poll to render a fair and accurate judgment?

Today's polls shouldn't reflect the full impact of the debate, because the three day tracking polls are still measuring Tuesday and Wednesday. So they're full of shit, as usual. As for the one point tightening, well, it's really unlikely Obama will carry an eight point lead all the way to election day. We should see some tightening as the undecideds finally make up their minds. The state polls always lag behind the national polls, so if there is a genuine tightening going on, it will shop up in the state polls next week.

ArcturusMengsk wrote:

Tribun wrote:I don't want to bust into panic this time.

The usual suspects on pollster.com claim the whole day that since the national tracking polls have tightened a bit, that McCain gains from the debate, and the most delusional ones even see a McCain surge.

However, in the state polls, he actually loses. So what the hell is going on?

Goddammit, will you stop with this? They're all relying on Zogby, who push-polls to get the answers he wants.

Well, thing is they refer to Rasmussen and DailyKos.

Tribun wrote:

ArcturusMengsk wrote:

Tribun wrote:I don't want to bust into panic this time.

The usual suspects on pollster.com claim the whole day that since the national tracking polls have tightened a bit, that McCain gains from the debate, and the most delusional ones even see a McCain surge.

However, in the state polls, he actually loses. So what the hell is going on?

Goddammit, will you stop with this? They're all relying on Zogby, who push-polls to get the answers he wants.

Well, thing is they refer to Rasmussen and DailyKos.

Obama's up four in the Rasmussen poll, which is very likely to be just statistical noise that happens from time to time given yesterday's polling (and even a four-point lead at this time of year is substantially better than Kerry, who was down roughly the same amount this time last year). And DailyKos shows Obama leading by ten. That's fine.

There's a difference between the Zogby Interactive and the regular Zogby poll. The Zogby Interactive poll is worthless, but the regular Zogby poll is respectable. Looking at the numbers now, in fact, the Reuters/Zogby national tracking poll shows no change since yesterday (R2000/DailyKos, Battleground, and Gallup all show slight tightening, while Rasmussen is unchanged and Diageo/Hotline shows a one point uptick for Obama). So really, there's not even enough data to say there's much of a tightening going on.

Btw., you should really go to pollster and read the ramblings of the usue "boomshak". He is undoubtly the best example of an dellusional extreme-Republican, and if it weren't meant serious, would be perfect comedy.

Tribun wrote:Btw., you should really go to pollster and read the ramblings of the usue "boomshak". He is undoubtly the best example of an dellusional extreme-Republican, and if it weren't meant serious, would be perfect comedy.

Tribun, from now on, visit no polling sites other than Electoral-Vote.com and FiveThirtyEight. These sites use weighted polls to predict the outcome, rather than day-to-day snapshots that are liable to give you a heart attack. Unless I see you quoting these sites as posting worrying electoral vote totals, I am going to mock you mercilessly every time you post another one of these "Hey guys, I'm scared!" posts.

The following was quopted from the "McCain Debate" thread and I thought it worthy to mention here

ArcturusMengsk wrote:The NRSC is out of Colorado.

Republican sources in Colorado and Washington say that the National Republican Senatorial Committee plans to pull out of the state by next week, an acknowledgment that its independent expenditure resources would be better spent on defense elsewhere.

Not that pertinent to this thread, but not worthy of its own, either.

IMHO this IS worthy of note, mostly because, this might sound silly, but the election could hinge on Colorado.
If we look at the electoral map, and give all the leaning obama states to obama, and all the leaning McCain states to McCain, the vote count breaks down to 264, to 164... For the sake of argument, well throw in Virgina and North Carolina as well given their immense red history. That bumps it to 264 to 202.

Now then, if IF Obama gets Colorado, hes bumped to to 273 and BANG, hes president. in this scenario, McCain can get EVERY last swing state and Still not win. Ohio, Florida, Missouri, and Nevada. those could ALL go for McCain, and, as long as Obama wins in NM and CO, he'll still get the presidency.

So there you have it, even in a worst case set up, with McCain winning everything else... if Obama wins in CO, its game over.

Thoughts?

I saw an old Kohler commecial today, I think McCain would have gotten more traction with Jo the Plumber instead of Joe the Plumber.

McC wrote:

Tribun wrote:Btw., you should really go to pollster and read the ramblings of the usue "boomshak". He is undoubtly the best example of an dellusional extreme-Republican, and if it weren't meant serious, would be perfect comedy.

Tribun, from now on, visit no polling sites other than Electoral-Vote.com and FiveThirtyEight. These sites use weighted polls to predict the outcome, rather than day-to-day snapshots that are liable to give you a heart attack. Unless I see you quoting these sites as posting worrying electoral vote totals, I am going to mock you mercilessly every time you post another one of these "Hey guys, I'm scared!" posts.

AAAAAAAH! I'M SCARED MCCAIN WILL WIN THE ELECTION!!!! AAAAH!!!! HOLD ME AND MAKE ME FEEL BETTER!

Crossroads Inc. wrote:The following was quopted from the "McCain Debate" thread and I thought it worthy to mention here

ArcturusMengsk wrote:The NRSC is out of Colorado.

Republican sources in Colorado and Washington say that the National Republican Senatorial Committee plans to pull out of the state by next week, an acknowledgment that its independent expenditure resources would be better spent on defense elsewhere.

Not that pertinent to this thread, but not worthy of its own, either.

IMHO this IS worthy of note, mostly because, this might sound silly, but the election could hinge on Colorado.
If we look at the electoral map, and give all the leaning obama states to obama, and all the leaning McCain states to McCain, the vote count breaks down to 264, to 164... For the sake of argument, well throw in Virgina and North Carolina as well given their immense red history. That bumps it to 264 to 202.

Now then, if IF Obama gets Colorado, hes bumped to to 273 and BANG, hes president. in this scenario, McCain can get EVERY last swing state and Still not win. Ohio, Florida, Missouri, and Nevada. those could ALL go for McCain, and, as long as Obama wins in NM and CO, he'll still get the presidency.

So there you have it, even in a worst case set up, with McCain winning everything else... if Obama wins in CO, its game over.

Thoughts?

This isn't news. The Kerry states + Iowa, New Mexico, and Colorado has been the narrowest possible Obama victory for months. The only narrower win is the Kerry states, Iowa, New Mexico, and Nevada, which, assuming no faithless electors, would generate a 269-269 tie, which the House would break in Obama's favor. I'm long past hoping for the smallest possible victory. I want at least a 50 EV margin, to scuttle any potential courtroom shenanigans and give Obama a clear mandate.

At any rate, Obama has Iowa in the bag and New Mexico is almost a foregone conclusion, as well. For that reason, McCain will not pull out of Colorado. You'll notice the it's the NRSC that's pulling out of CO, not the RNC or the McCain campaign. The NRSC is just acknowledging the reality that Mark Udall is going to win Wayne Allard's senate seat in a landslide, and the NRSC doesn't have the money to waste on hopeless campaigns (as it is they barely have the money to spend on close races). But McCain won't abandon Colorado, because that would be conceding the election.

More signs of McCain's desperation: I just saw an ad openly criticizing the Bush administration. "The past 8 years haven't worked very well have they?"

But it's okay, he has a "plan."

When you're a GOP candidate openly criticizing Bush, in Texas, you're in trouble.

The Spartan wrote:More signs of McCain's desperation: I just saw an ad openly criticizing the Bush administration. "The past 8 years haven't worked very well have they?"

But it's okay, he has a "plan."

When you're a GOP candidate openly criticizing Bush, in Texas, you're in trouble.

They've got ads on in Texas?

RedImperator wrote:They've got ads on in Texas?

Oh yeah. Most of them are McCain but I'll hear or see Obama ones now and again.

The Spartan wrote:

RedImperator wrote:They've got ads on in Texas?

Oh yeah. Most of them are McCain but I'll hear or see Obama ones now and again.

They must be national ad buys. According to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, neither candidate is spending money on ads in Texas.

RedImperator wrote:They must be national ad buys. According to the Wisconsin Advertising Project, neither candidate is spending money on ads in Texas.

Probably. I was watching the Discovery channel at the time.

Which makes sense, now I think about it.

Tribun wrote:I don't want to bust into panic this time.

The usual suspects on pollster.com claim the whole day that since the national tracking polls have tightened a bit, that McCain gains from the debate, and the most delusional ones even see a McCain surge.

However, in the state polls, he actually loses. So what the hell is going on?

That's it. You're too stupid. You're not allowed any more national tracking polls. You've made it clear you can't understand them.

Crossroads Inc. wrote:IMHO this IS worthy of note, mostly because, this might sound silly, but the election could hinge on Colorado.
If we look at the electoral map, and give all the leaning obama states to obama, and all the leaning McCain states to McCain, the vote count breaks down to 264, to 164... For the sake of argument, well throw in Virgina and North Carolina as well given their immense red history. That bumps it to 264 to 202.

Now then, if IF Obama gets Colorado, hes bumped to to 273 and BANG, hes president. in this scenario, McCain can get EVERY last swing state and Still not win. Ohio, Florida, Missouri, and Nevada. those could ALL go for McCain, and, as long as Obama wins in NM and CO, he'll still get the presidency.

So there you have it, even in a worst case set up, with McCain winning everything else... if Obama wins in CO, its game over.

Thoughts?

Not to re-hash ground that Red already went over but Colorado right now is polling at an Obama +5 and Virginia is polling at Obama +3.9. After you adjust for pollster partisan lean (which 538 does) Colorado jumps to +7 and Virginia does the same. Simply put either of those two states could be considered equally likely Obama pickups at this point. We would be looking at a massive collapse in Obama's numbers before he would lose both.

Again this comes down to the math and where it is favored to go. Kerry lost to Bush 286-252 so lets use that as the basis for comparison. Early models had McCain competing in NH and stealing those votes but right now it looks like he is destroying his brand there as fast as elsewhere so NH is likely off the map. Next we have IA and 7 electoral votes where Obama's lead is in the double digits. We are now at 279-259.

With that as a given lets look at the different routes to victory from there:

+VA (13 EVs, shifts to a 272-266 Obama win)
+NM, +CO (5EV and 9EV for a 273-265 Obama Win)
+NM, +NV, +WV (5EV for all three and you get a 274-264 Obama win)
+NC (15EVs for a 274-264 Obama win)
+OH (20EVs for a 279-259 Obama win)
+FL (27EVs for a reversal of 2004 at 286-252 for Obama)
+IN (11EVs for a 270-268 Obama win)
+MO (11EVs for a different 270-268 Obama win)

Now those are just a few combinations and only one is a three state switchero. The thig is that Obama can play offense in ALL of those states (plus GA, MT, ND, and NE-1 and NE-2) while McCian has to defend ALL of them. Only one of those combinations requires 3 states and only one requires 2. Those are 6 states which will swing the election by themselves. McCain would have to play 6/6 defense on them and also prevent the 2 state or 3 state combo from slipping in. That means he has to play near perfect defense in 10 states plus solid defense in 4 others where Obama is competing agressively.

Ender wrote:You really have to love the fact that Joe the Plumber is neither named Joe, nor a plumber. His first name is Sam and he doesn't have a license to be a plumber.

Didn't they recently also found out he done a little tax fraud as well?

He apparently owed some state income taxes, 1200 bucks or something in that line.