SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PoliticsView from the Center and Left


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: Steve Lokness who wrote (206899)11/4/2012 9:56:14 AM
From: JohnM
   of 503047
 
Do you really think your calls will change a vote at this time?

Two different kinds of calls and I've done both. One is to try to persuade friends and neighbors to vote for someone they know. And not vote for someone else they know. Small town political activity. It's very valuable.

The second is get out the vote calls. You create a list of your supporters in town and call them all on voting eve and even on voting day to encourage them to get to the polls to vote.

As for the present national election, NJ is out of play. You can, however, call folk in other states and there are phone banks around here doing so. Those phone banks are likely to be very effective in gotv. Remember, I'm talking about lists of your supporters.

But to go back to the first item, persuading. It's my impression that these lists are so fine tuned, so intricately developed, that a person to person call, not a robo call, can become a friendly chat about voting options. I haven't done it this time around because of other issues here at home. But I would be surprised if it were ineffective.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Dale Baker who wrote (206907)11/4/2012 9:57:17 AM
From: Dale Baker
   of 503047
 
Anticipating Right-Wing Criticism, NBC News Offers ‘Unskewed’ Take On Its Poll








David Taintor November 3, 2012, 10:02 PM

NBC News, anticipating backlash over polls released Saturday that showed President Obama ahead in two crucial swing states, attempted to head off conservative criticism that the surveys sampled too many Democrats by preemptively “unskewing” its own numbers.

The polls, released jointly by NBC News, the Wall Street Journal, and Marist College, showed Obama leading Republican challenger Mitt Romney by six points in Ohio and two points in Florida. But in the Ohio poll, Democrats held a nine-point party identification advantage — a figure sure to draw conservative ire. (In Florida, Democrats held a two-point advantage.)

So as part of a story online about the polls on Saturday, NBC News senior political editor Mark Murray included a section essentially imagining if the findings of his organization’s own poll were altered in a way that showed the Democratic sample in Ohio cut in half. In that case, Murray wrote, Obama’s lead would shrink to three points.

In an email to TPM late Saturday, Murray explained his reasoning behind it.

“We anticipated that there would be criticism of a D+9 sample, and asked our pollsters to assume — as an exercise — what the race would be simply if you halved that Democratic Party ID advantage,” Murray wrote. “We decided to publish that information in my story (towards the end, mind you). But make no mistake: The numbers are the numbers, and we stand by them.”

Criticizing pollsters for allegedly oversampling Democrats has become a cottage industry on the right. Over at National Review Online, Josh Jordan on Saturday referred to Marist’s polling as an “in-kind contribution to Obama.”

On the party ID advantage, he wrote: “Essentially Marist is finding that Democrats are not only going to match their turnout advantage from 2008, but they are actually going to almost double it. That lines up well with Romney drawing 30,000 to a rally in Ohio while Obama pulled just a fraction for his rallies. Or not.”

The criticism tends to center on the notion that Democratic enthusiasm is down. Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion, in September how it can be that Democrats still enjoy a party ID advantage four years after the “apex of hope and change in 2008.”

“Well, what you do, you don’t pick the number,” Miringoff said at the time. “It’s based on the interviews with the people you do. So it’s not like you’re punching in a 10 point party spread. It’s based on the interviews and who remains in the pool. You don’t want a three credit lesson right now in survey research, I’m sure.”

But in an interview with TPM on Saturday, Miringoff declined to criticize Murray’s writeup about the poll. He described the part that halved the Democratic sample as nothing more than an “exercise” and speculated that it was likely “reacting to comments” from Republicans.

He also said he stands by the numbers in the poll itself. “There is no other figure than the figure you get in the poll,” Miringoff said.

“When polling gets into the popular world of politics, then some of the reactions to the polls are a little quick,” he said. “Polls can be right, and polls can be wrong. And we’ll all find out on Tuesday.”

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Sam who wrote (206900)11/4/2012 9:59:04 AM
From: JohnM
   of 503047
 
What is surprising and comforting about that piece is that Roger Simon wrote it. Simon is part of the RW.

Sam, if you are talking about the Roger Simon who writes for Politico, I think it's a bit more nuanced. My impression is that, at least in the last couple of years, he's leaned right but not gone over the cliff. I found him worth reading but always with a pinch of salt.

Perhaps you are thinking of some other Roger Simon?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


From: NAG111/4/2012 9:59:09 AM
   of 503047
 
Voted early on Friday after work because I couldn't say that I will have the time on Tuesday to vote. The lines were pretty long and I finally was able to cast my vote about an hour after the polling place officially closed. After I voted, it seemed like the line waiting to vote was still about an hour long.

Since Georgia is not a battleground state, we have been spared the vast majority of political ads. It has made for a much calmer campaign season. We used to live in Ohio and we were constantly bombarded with advertising. In Georgia, not so much because, right now, the state is pretty much a Republican state with the Rs controlling the state house and senate as well as having Nathan Deal as governor.

Just a couple of random thoughts on the election. I sort of got the feeling that the media/press was trying to keep the presidential election close. My conspiracy theory there is that by keeping it close, it keeps the campaigns spending which is good for all types of media. I am hoping that Nate Silver is correct in his assessment of Obama's chances of winning. I am hoping, especially with the experience he has gained in the past 4 years as well not having to run another campaign, that Obama will be stronger and better equipped to deals with the Republican obstructionism. While I was reading the parade section of the Sunday paper, they had a page of campaign slogans from past presidential campaigns. One that they chose was from FDR in 1936 which was pretty simple, "Remember Hoover". I wonder if the Obama campaign would have been better served with a similar type of message, at least for part of the campaign.

Neal

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: neolib who wrote (206903)11/4/2012 10:02:05 AM
From: JohnM
   of 503047
 
How is he getting CO at 68% chance for Obama? I thought most the polls are showing the opposite: going for Romney.

My impression is a bit different. I've tried to use only one electoral map, the Huffington Post which seemed most reliable and a bit slower to make changes. They've consistently had Colorado as a tossup with a small polling edge for Obama. There maps, like many of the electoral map making outfits, are built out of polling averages so there's little doubt that most polls show Obama ahead. But the differences are apparently slight.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Dale Baker who wrote (206904)11/4/2012 10:03:09 AM
From: JohnM
   of 503047
 
Ah, thanks for the Silver break down of the CO polls. I was headed in search of them as soon as I completed this reading of the forum.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Dale Baker who wrote (206889)11/4/2012 10:03:52 AM
From: epicure
   of 503047
 
The wingers are about as consistent as weathervanes. Reagan fucked up royally several times- Iran-Contra, the Marines in Beirut en.wikipedia.org (lest we forget- another stupid foreign adventure for a wingnut- one which he was warned against taking)- and then there's The Shrub- with fuck ups in Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11 on his watch. We know there were warnings for 9/11- why don't they hold Bush responsible? That's a heck of a lot more than 4 people- and many of them worked for our government. Now I don't hold the president responsible for everything- he's at the top, and he won't know about all the memos- but the Shrub's admin by any metric, seems to have been full of fools- and yet, the republicans didn't seem to notice. Now, when there's a problem at an embassy that was apparently a CIA nest they jump the gun all over the place, tripping over themselves to second guess the situation. Where were they when their presidents were screwing up right and left? Nowhere. Crickets chirp. Where are they when FEMA does an outstanding job handling Sandy? Again- crickets chirp (though local republicans are grateful). I'm sure the wingnutties will find some small areas that could have been handled better, and fixate on those, but really, why does anyone listed to these folks any more? 9/11- on their watch. A foolish war in Iraq- on their watch. Another foolish war in Afghanistan- on their watch. Iran- contra- on their watch. And so many other fuck ups, we really could not list them all here.I will leave the Shrub's father out of this because I actually liked a lot of what he did. His pushback on Iraq made sense to me I thought he did the right thing, working with all our allies. But the other republican presidents? fools, pandering to fools

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)


To: JohnM who wrote (206914)11/4/2012 10:06:32 AM
From: Dale Baker
   of 503047
 
Here is Silver's table and the factors he mixes in - I'm sure his site explains each line in detail.

Colorado FiveThirtyEight Projections Dem Rep Margin
Polling average 48.0 46.7 Obama +1.3
Adjusted polling average 47.9 46.3 Obama +1.6
State fundamentals 48.0 46.3 Obama +1.7
Now-cast 47.9 46.3 Obama +1.6
Projected vote share ±3.3 50.2 48.7 Obama +1.5

Chance of winning 68% 32%

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Dale Baker who wrote (206893)11/4/2012 10:07:26 AM
From: epicure
   of 503047
 
He should get a bounce from that. My daughter's friend lost her house in Sandy- but she has nothing but positive things to say about the government response. She's young; she was insured; she's living with her grandparents now. She will bounce back. And luckily, we have a strong federal response which will help her to get back on her feet.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Metacomet who wrote (206890)11/4/2012 10:08:01 AM
From: JohnM
   of 503047
 
Problem is that you remain dependent on the grid

Pretty sure gas is shut off as the threat of fire, like Rockaway, is high

Seems to me that you want your generator solution totally independent

Good thoughts. Thanks. We'll keep them in mind.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10