2008 Presidential Election - Obama v McCain (2 Viewers)

[Iron]

President Clinton with classic lukewarm attitude to Obama on Letterman. Kept talking up McCain - insisted on being fair to both

 

[Trefoil]

Yeah, all that's really left is how big the Bradley effect will be. There's no way to measure this. Obama will most likely offset it by increasing the historically low turnout of his loyal groups: blacks and young. Also racists etc may swallow their discrimination because they trust Obama more with the bigger issue of the economy

The Bradley Effect has been discredit countless times, including by the pollsters who originally proposed it. It's a total null issue.

Even if it actually mattered, early voting proves the black and youth votes are real and more than a match, as you alluded.

 

[Iron]

The Bradley Effect has been discredit countless times, including by the pollsters who originally proposed it. It's a total null issue.

.

Yew got some peer-reviewed proof on that compadre?

 

[Iron]

You got some peer-reviewed proof that there is a god who we should obey?

Roman Catholic Church dotcom

 

[HalcyonSky]

I didnt think Iron was actually religious?

 

[Iron]

So basically you're happy to accept the rules of logic and science for almost everything because they work and improve our standards of living.

But you grant this huge exception where religion is introduced.

What? As far as the assertions of the Bible are concerned, the Catholic Church is the peer reviewing body. It's a false dichotomy (I know you like these debating terms) to say that religion and science are irreconcilable. Nay, it's a strawman too!

Keep this outta the president's thread my fren!

 

[Trefoil]

Yew got some peer-reviewed proof on that compadre?

You got some peer-reviewed proof the Bradley Effect even exists, mate? Fair's fair, after all.

But I think this'll satisfy your hypocritical requests for evidence, though:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/if-bradley-effect-is-gone-what-happened.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/persistent-myth-of-bradley-effect.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/111049/Obamas-Race-May-Much-Plus-Minus.aspx
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/bradleywilder_new_data_on_inte.php

 

[Trefoil]

I didnt think Iron was actually religious?

As disturbing as his troll facade is, the more disturbing thing is that it seems similar to his actual feelings on matters.

For example: thinks abortion is murder, thinks homosexuality is morally wrong, and thinks sex should be a 'virtue' saved for marriage.

It wouldn't be a stretch suspect he's quite religious.

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

Alex is trying to reconcile his more socially liberal self with his long-held beliefs. It's a struggle that many face. Don't begrudge him this moral development.

 

[Ubik]

Favourite ad of the campaign?

I give it to McCain's introductory one, 624787 whatever: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=j-QYIP7o2-A

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy0N4026DHA

Mccain dominates the opposition here imo.

 

[Iron]

You got some peer-reviewed proof the Bradley Effect even exists, mate? Fair's fair, after all.

But I think this'll satisfy your hypocritical requests for evidence, though:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/if-bradley-effect-is-gone-what-happened.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/persistent-myth-of-bradley-effect.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/111049/Obamas-Race-May-Much-Plus-Minus.aspx
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/bradleywilder_new_data_on_inte.php

I believe that Mr Bradley was a black man running for office. 24hrs before polling he was something like 5 points ahead and expected to win; 24hrs later he lost by 5%. Nothing had happened in the meantime and thus the Bradley effect theory was born.

None of those sources were peer reviewed, anyway. I'm not saying the theory is concrete, but I am refuting your suggestion that it's "null" and has been 'countlessly disproven'

 

[Trefoil]

I believe that Mr Bradley was a black man running for office. 24hrs before polling he was something like 5 points ahead and expected to win; 24hrs later he lost by 5%. Nothing had happened in the meantime and thus the Bradley effect theory was born.

None of those sources were peer reviewed, anyway. I'm not saying the theory is concrete, but I am refuting your suggestion that it's "null" and has been 'countlessly disproven'

What constitutes peer-reviewed to you? A bunch of reputable pollsters explaining why it's a load of bunk (including one of the original team) isn't enough? They're agreeing with each other's work and expanding on it. It might not be in a science journal (yet?) but I am pretty sure it still classifies as peer-reviewed to a reasonable degree of quality.

Especially read the account by the Republican pollster who was polling for the campaign against Bradley - his polls always showed Bradley about 2 points down - not 2% up like the other guy. Either way it was within the statistical noise margin of error (it certainly wasn't anything as big as 5%!).

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

The AP's put Obama at 44% and McBain at 43%

What the fuck?

 

[veloc1ty]

The AP-GfK survey included interviews with a nationally representative random sample totaling 1,101 adults, including 800 deemed likely to vote. For the entire sample, the survey showed Obama ahead 47 percent to 37 percent. He was up by five points among all registered voters, including the likely voters.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081022/D93VPI9O0.html

They just adjusted it weirdly to make it closer than it is.

Also: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

 

[Trefoil]

The AP's put Obama at 44% and McBain at 43%

What the fuck?

Yeah, the GWU/Battleground poll has a similar results. It's completely ludicrous.

538 did a good article on it here: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/todays-polls-1022.html

The funny thing is that for each poll that gives the gap as +1 or +2 to Obama, there's a poll that gives it +11 or +12.

I think realistically we can say that Rasmussen and Gallup's expanded likely voter models are accurate at +6 and +8 for Obama respectively.

 

[veloc1ty]

Is there a list of the biggest US election wins? Failing that, what was the margin of the biggest ever win?

 

[TacoTerrorist]

What kind of a person would vote for McCain? Seriously. Wtf.

 

[spiny norman]

Is there a list of the biggest US election wins? Failing that, what was the margin of the biggest ever win?

Well, Washington's two elections in 1789 and 1792 saw him run unopposed, as was Monroe in 1820.

Otherwise, ten times in history there was a margin >20%;

1800: Thomas Jefferson - 61.4%, John Adams - 38.6%
1804: Thomas Jefferson - 72.8%, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney - 27.2%
1808: James Madison - 64.7%, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney - 32.4%
1816: James Monroe - 68.2%, Rufus King - 30.9%
1912: Woodrow Wilson - 41.8%, Theodore Roosevelt - 27.4%, William Howard Taft - 23.2%
1920: Warren G. Harding - 60.3%, James M. Cox - 34.1%
1924: Calvin Coolidge - 54%, John W. Davis - 28.8%, Robert M. La Follete Sr. - 16.6%
1936: Franklin D. Roosevelt - 60.8%, Alf Landon - 36.5%
1964: Lyndon B. Johnson - 61.1%, Barry Goldwater 38.5%
1972: Richard Nixon - 60.7%, George McGovern - 37.5%

 

[hsb39]

Obama being assassinated would be the worst. Then we'd have to hear Oprah and fucking Sean Penn or whoever rave on about him being a martyr. I don't need to read that shit for another 35 years.

Although if Obama dies in office, we get Biden (who I actually prefer over Obama). Look at the situation if Mccain dies... Palin.

 

[BackCountrySnow]

How can obama be leading in the polls?

He is black, his people are responsible for 90+% of crime in the USA
He is a muslim, the biggest retrograde force on western democracy.
He is an arab, an advocate of terrorism
He is a communist, he believes in total government ownership
He is friends with terrorists and doesnt see anything wrong with that....

How can Americans be so stupid to pick Obama over a tested true american war hero? A maverick who will bring the actual change we need in the white house.