[hrothgar]

 mike777, on 2012-October-10, 14:10, said:

The Suffolk University Political Research Center has determined Mitt Romney is a lock to win the battleground states of Florida, Virginia and North Carolina and will not conduct additional polls there during the final four weeks of the presidential election

Good old Suffolk University...

[hrothgar]

 luke warm, on 2012-October-15, 15:23, said:

right now i'm leaning R to win the general at 52% - 48% with about 320+ electoral votes... if PA and MI somehow squeak by for obama, then romney will only get around 284 or so... final prediction in 2 weeks

Squeak, squeak...

Looks like the real question is whether Obama will win both Florida and Virginia...

[hrothgar]

Switching over to watching Fox, just to see folks squirm...

[MickyB]

Obama behind on popular vote but Intrade suggests he'll ultimately finish ahead, probably by 1% or more. It also suggests Obama is 90% to take Florida and Colorado and 55% to take Virginia, Obama was 10-12% to take 330EV three weeks ago.

[Lanor Fow]

amused by a comment on bloomberg about nate silver 'you hit one soft pitch down the middle and...'

Don't get me wrong i'm expecting an obama victory here, and waiting up to see it (in the uk), but havign read this thread the comment amused me

[hrothgar]

Two quick words for my conservative friends: "epistemic closure".

Well, that and "Kiss my lily white ass Republican scum!".

Night all...

[hrothgar]

Looks like Romney's path to victory now runs through California

[Vampyr]

Count the votes in Ohio already, so I can go to bed!

[BunnyGo]

 Vampyr, on 2012-November-06, 21:58, said:

Count the votes in Ohio already, so I can go to bed!

It's over...go to bed. They've only counted 30% of Cuyahoga and Obama is up in southern Ohio.

[MickyB]

 Vampyr, on 2012-November-06, 21:58, said:

Count the votes in Ohio already, so I can go to bed!

332 has been a cert for the past 40 mins or so

[hrothgar]

 MickyB, on 2012-November-06, 22:05, said:

332 has been a cert for the past 40 mins or so

332 is a good result for Silver....

[BunnyGo]

MSNBC just called it...go to bed.

[hrothgar]

Now all we need to do is outlast Scalia...

[Vampyr]

 BunnyGo, on 2012-November-06, 22:21, said:

MSNBC just called it...go to bed.

As soon as the President comes on...

[kenberg]

Obama has won re-election, Boehner has announced that the Republicans in Congress will continue to paralyze America.

All pretty much as predicted.

[y66]

All is well here in Virginia.

[JLOGIC]

gg

[BunnyGo]

http://xkcd.com/1131/

[Zelandakh]

 1eyedjack, on 2012-November-06, 15:19, said:

I was reading an article on why the election is always on a Tuesday."Saturday was a workday on the farm, travel on Sunday was out, and Wednesday was a market day. That left Tuesday."

You forgot to quote the passage directly above this which explains the reasoning. People needed a day to travel before voting. Since travelling on a Sunday was out, this meant that voting on a Monday was out. They have not explained why Friday was not possible here but I think it is logical that having people vote before market day was perhapsm preferable to voting before work day, especially as they would presumably get back from travelling quite late.

 dwar0123, on 2012-November-06, 18:35, said:

If you believe strongly in predetermination, than nothing matters. At all.
If you believe strongly in free will, than you believe people should be able to make all the stupid choices they want and face the consequences as they come.

It is possible to believe in Free Will and Predetermination at the same time. In fact, mainstream Christianity does. The argument runs that God allows every person Free Will, the ability to choose as they like. However He is also omniscient and knows in advance how they will choose. That is, the result is predetermined (from an omniscient point of view at least).

 TimG, on 2012-November-06, 18:41, said:

Slavery was OK before there was a Constitutional Amendment prohibiting it?

It was in Republican states!


Having woken up to Romney's concession speech over breakfast this morning and seeing the popular vote versus electoral college numbers, I had to wonder about how Republicans might take this result. Remember that US demographics over the next 4+ years are predicted to be heavily favourable for Democrats. What would it take for a Republican to be elected outside of an economy that got close to meltdown?

Luke, you know the base better than anyone here. Let's say a serious, charismatic candidate came along who said:
"I am pro-choice for abortion in the first trimester only, so long as the full consequences and all other possibilities are explained to the woman before the decision is made."
"I believe in lower taxes but will not do this until the debt is under control and we can afford them."
"Government spending must be lower to help lower the debt. I will look at all government programmes for cost savings including defence."
"I want the military to be strong but will generally only intervene overseas when this is necessary for our national interest, for example to prevent an enemy getting nuclear weapons."
"I am opposed to Obamacare but healthcare must be available to all and it will remain until a suitable alternative can be implemented."

In other words, a candidate slightly to the right of centre who would be extremely attractive to independant voters. Would they have a snowball's chance in Hell of becoming the Republican nominee?

This seems to be the huge problem. The base is turning right at a time when the party desperately needs to turn left. The Labour party did this in England during the 80s and spent a generation in opposition. Surely someone there has to be able to learn from history? There are some seriously good brains behind the party after all.

[cherdano]

I think that yes, Nate Silver can be correct.