Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 31, 2014, 03:27:41 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 152
76  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 House Election Polls / Re: CA-17/SUSA: Honda +2 on: October 20, 2014, 11:25:29 pm
I can't get worried about a Dem vs. Dem race, Khanna isn't going to vote for Boehner and that counts for a lot. With a seat at D+20, there's little risk of him doing anything that is too conservative.
77  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Latino Decisions/NCLRAF: Udall wallops Gardner among Latinos on: October 20, 2014, 08:41:45 pm
Not everyone shares the conservative view that if the EPA was eliminated that jobs would skyrocket. Colorado is a state that has a lot to protect environmentally, so it's not rocket science to understand why Hispanics there are supportive of the environment.

It is not possible to eliminate the EPA. It could be made to be more restrained and more to the point, though. Less activist.

The regulations have proven to be necessary, because companies aren't going to protect the environment on their own, the only thing that stops them is a fear of fines and shutdown.
78  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Latino Decisions/NCLRAF: Udall wallops Gardner among Latinos on: October 20, 2014, 08:11:31 pm
Not everyone shares the conservative view that if the EPA was eliminated that jobs would skyrocket. Colorado is a state that has a lot to protect environmentally, so it's not rocket science to understand why Hispanics there are supportive of the environment.
79  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: KY: SUSA: McConnell +1 on: October 20, 2014, 06:33:32 pm
There is still room for Grimes to win this.

Yeah, in your head, which certainly has plenty of room.

Go play with your Santorum, Roberts and Brownback dolls, okay? Bye, little boy.
80  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: KY: SUSA: McConnell +1 on: October 20, 2014, 06:26:13 pm
There is still room for Grimes to win this.
81  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: NH: YouGov: Shaheen leads by three in poll for UMass Amherst on: October 20, 2014, 06:21:36 pm
There was a tweet from the NHDP chair that did say that Republican internals had Brown down by 9%, so whether or not you want to believe that, KCDem didn't make that up.
82  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: AR-Hendrix College: Cotton +8 on: October 20, 2014, 06:18:07 pm
Blanched. Ding dong, the white liberals are finished.

You're a racist.
83  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: NRCC triages ME-02 on: October 20, 2014, 04:24:34 pm
I don't think a triage is ever really a good thing.
84  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Cohn (NYT): Early Voting Offers No Proof That Dems Have Improved Turnout Effort on: October 20, 2014, 11:41:46 am
Nevada and Ohio don't have really competitive races at the top of the ballot, so I wouldn't really expect a huge Democratic advantage in early voting in those places.
85  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Ken Buck, Ken Buck? on: October 19, 2014, 02:02:13 pm
This cycle, he's running for something he can't lose.
86  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: "Hey, I wonder what the polls looked like at this point in 2010?" on: October 18, 2014, 10:57:00 pm
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/de/delaware_senate_oadonnell_vs_coons-1670.html#polls

7/14 poll. And that was before anyone even thought that she would win the primary.
87  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: What is Gardner doing that Buck didn't to not fall flat on his face? on: October 18, 2014, 10:54:29 pm
Buck wasn't labeled a bad candidate until after he lost. It was a big surprise to Republicans that he lost and they threw him under the bus.
88  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: "Hey, I wonder what the polls looked like at this point in 2010?" on: October 18, 2014, 10:46:35 pm
I'm not sure how all the polls missed Boxer winning by 10%, that was a very big miss. I also recall how Rasmussen showed Christine O'Donnell leading at one point, even though that was completely absurd.
89  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 09:33:33 pm
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/elections/political-eye-pollster-tracked-berkleys-ups-downs

Quote
"Indeed, we were consistently 1-2 points behind for the last couple of weeks, and our final track was exactly where we ended up - a bit more than one point down," he added.

Mellman didn't release his final exact numbers on the race and would only discuss the margin. He said there were still 1 to 2 percent undecided voters right up until Election Day. He had "none of these candidates" and a third-party contender getting about 4 percent each, also on target.

Interesting that she did not choose to publicly release those internal polls showing her behind, instead publicly releasing polls showing her with a three-point lead. Will we hear after the election that Udall's internals privately showed him trailing as well?

Read it again, they never publicly released any internals in the last couple of weeks, when Berkley was down 1-2 points consistently, as it wouldn't make sense to release polls with your candidate trailing. If the internals showed Berkley down 1-2 points in the last couple of weeks, that was very accurate to the actual result. The polls showing Berkley up were released earlier in the month, not right before the election.
90  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 05:53:55 pm
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/elections/political-eye-pollster-tracked-berkleys-ups-downs

Quote
"Indeed, we were consistently 1-2 points behind for the last couple of weeks, and our final track was exactly where we ended up - a bit more than one point down," he added.

Mellman didn't release his final exact numbers on the race and would only discuss the margin. He said there were still 1 to 2 percent undecided voters right up until Election Day. He had "none of these candidates" and a third-party contender getting about 4 percent each, also on target.
91  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Republican pollster: Don't underestimate Dem turnout machine on: October 18, 2014, 05:20:42 pm
There are lots of voters who vote Democratic (Democrats and Independents) that really don't decide to vote until the last minute, which is why you have phone banking non-stop in the final weeks.
92  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Benenson (D): Also Udall +3 on: October 18, 2014, 04:55:41 pm
You shouldn't have posted this, the blue avatars don't like internals being posted.
93  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 01:40:22 pm
5150? What the hell does that mean?

Involuntary psychiatric hold. It's only a joke, not meant to be taken seriously.
94  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PPP-IA: Braley +1 on: October 18, 2014, 01:17:09 pm
If I'm not mistaken, there was a time that RCP didn't enter a poll last cycle, and it was an independent poll that wasn't commissioned by any group (it also showed a Republican trailing). RCP isn't all that trustworthy at times when it comes to entering polls.
95  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 01:11:50 pm
Mellman was the only one to get Reid's victory right in 2010.

Exactly.

Yes. Therefore this specific internal poll 4 years later in a different state with a different set of candidates is most likely correct ... because math and science. And because Gardner is an extreme extremisty extremist. Abortion!

5150 time. Please, calm down, no one likes overly dramatic posts. Again, I'm standing by my predictions, thanks.
The 5150 meme is getting really, really old. Did you just figure it out today? Because your giving KC Spanking Dem a run for his money.

You are on my ignore list, so stop posting to me. It's annoying.
96  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 01:06:27 pm
Mellman was the only one to get Reid's victory right in 2010.

Exactly.

Yes. Therefore this specific internal poll 4 years later in a different state with a different set of candidates is most likely correct ... because math and science. And because Gardner is an extreme extremisty extremist. Abortion!

5150 time. Please, calm down, no one likes overly dramatic posts. Again, I'm standing by my predictions, thanks.
97  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 12:29:55 pm
Mellman was the only one to get Reid's victory right in 2010.

Exactly.
98  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 11:26:43 am
Not a bad result for a +6 Republican sample. No one should be surprised if the Dem internals end up being accurate again. Democrats just don't mess around when it comes to internals, they can't afford to.

Yeah, because internals aren't released to look favorable to the candidate to rile up their base or anything to make it look like they have a chance.

All the non-partisan Senate polls are wrong. (Except those in Georgia, North Carolina and New Hampshire that show the Democrat ahead, right?)

Again, in 2012, the internals were better at measuring the actual turnout, because a lot of the public pollsters were assuming a bigger drop off in turnout which ended up not happening.

Again, 2012 was a Presidential election year. A good number of pollsters still got it right. This is a six-year election for a two-term President. Off-year elections favor Republicans. Six-year elections are usually bad to the party of the two-term President.

Could Udall be ahead in Colorado right now? Probably not. He's behind in most polls from non-partisan sources with the exception of the YouGov poll. These polls have Gardner ahead the fringes of the margin of error.  

If you cite a D+3 poll in Iowa, that's one thing, it's around the MOE and plausible. But Udall +3 in Colorado, it doesn't match the other margins. Most reasonable minds would have to conclude that this is your typical internal poll where you are trying to rally your base.

And note, I am not saying that Udall can't pull this off. The status of the race on October 18 suggests otherwise, however.

We'll see what happens on election night. Everyone's predictions will be proven right or wrong then. I'm not going to flip out if my predictions are wrong.

The tradition isn't 'flipping out'; it's 'slinking away quietly'.

I remember quite a few overconfident Romney supporters doing that.
99  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: CO-Mellman (D): Udall+3 in internal on: October 18, 2014, 11:20:55 am
Not a bad result for a +6 Republican sample. No one should be surprised if the Dem internals end up being accurate again. Democrats just don't mess around when it comes to internals, they can't afford to.

Yeah, because internals aren't released to look favorable to the candidate to rile up their base or anything to make it look like they have a chance.

All the non-partisan Senate polls are wrong. (Except those in Georgia, North Carolina and New Hampshire that show the Democrat ahead, right?)

Again, in 2012, the internals were better at measuring the actual turnout, because a lot of the public pollsters were assuming a bigger drop off in turnout which ended up not happening.

Again, 2012 was a Presidential election year. A good number of pollsters still got it right. This is a six-year election for a two-term President. Off-year elections favor Republicans. Six-year elections are usually bad to the party of the two-term President.

Could Udall be ahead in Colorado right now? Probably not. He's behind in most polls from non-partisan sources with the exception of the YouGov poll. These polls have Gardner ahead the fringes of the margin of error.  

If you cite a D+3 poll in Iowa, that's one thing, it's around the MOE and plausible. But Udall +3 in Colorado, it doesn't match the other margins. Most reasonable minds would have to conclude that this is your typical internal poll where you are trying to rally your base.

And note, I am not saying that Udall can't pull this off. The status of the race on October 18 suggests otherwise, however.

We'll see what happens on election night. Everyone's predictions will be proven right or wrong then. I'm not going to flip out if my predictions are wrong.
100  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: PPP-IA: Braley +1 on: October 18, 2014, 11:10:17 am
Setting all those things aside, it should be disturbing to everyone that Ernst called a mass shooting an accident, just to defend guns. How is that a normal thing to say?

Yeah because no candidate ever misspoke. Ever in the history of politics. Politically stupid, yes. Taken out of context, a bit. But evidence of mental illness. No.

I didn't say she was mentally ill. One doesn't have to be clinically insane to say crazy things.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 152


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines