The Big Cat

Fact: You've never conducted nor commissioned a poll before.

And as I'm about to agree with below, polls are bull ****. They've been the basis for all your arguments in this thread, even when presented with contrary "evidence." Also, my initial (real) response was that the Bain attacks were effectual since they've since put Romney on the Bain defensive. If you agree that Romney's on the Bain defensive (!@#$ the polls), then you'd agree that Obama's strategy IN JUNE AND JULY (back to my original post in this thread: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/147888-looks-like-the-bain-attacks-have-had/page__view__findpost__p__2511185) has definitely been effectual. I brought up Nate Silver because you were basing your asshat argument on !@#$ing polls which don't mean a hill of beans, which you've forthrightly acknowledged in the face of a pollster whose results you've don't agree with. Totally agree with these two polls posts, and lest we forget the 24 hour talking heads have nothing to blather about if the race isn't a "dead heat." Good luck finding any national media organization reporting on a poll that shows the race will be a blowout. Hell no, they'll dangle that carrot as long as they can, and keep us interested, telling us what to think. Take the view from the 30,000 feet though, and you're likely to see something much, much different. I see a candidate who's wildly unpopular with those who lean right, but adored by women and minorities. The former is light years from his base the latter will give him the edge. edited for clarity!!

What a wise and diplomatic edit to a pathetic continuation of an argument, solely for argument's sake. I don't know why I try my own sanity sometimes. From here forth, your dribble will remain ignored.

Yes, I'm losing a debate to someone who has no stance. I love how you posted this seconds before I contributed nothing but numbers. So let me ask you straight up, do you think Romney will win, and if yes, where's your evidence? Is it because he's (by your definition) narrowly trailing in 60 percent of the polls conducted over the last month?

That's the average of all the margins, if we were going by probability based on number of polls won, Obama has a 20 point edge. Why not go back a full year--162 polls for Obama, 46 polls for Romney, 23 tied. But yes, the likelihood of them winning is a simple as average of all the margins.

Yes, because presidential elections are lifetime commitments. Air tight analogy!

"Practically dead even race." And you accuse Nate Silver of skewing data? I'm showing 6 polls that have Obama ahead, 3 for Romney and 1 tied in the last month. Obama takes twice as many polls as Romney, yet it's a dead even race? Okay! http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html#polls I'm sure there's a liberal bent to these numbers, though. There's gotta be. Also, the hyperbole of using Nate Silver as an example seemed to fly right over your pointy head. But whatever, par of the course around here.

You guys can bend and twist anyway you like to make you feel more confident in your GOP golden boy. Why face reality, right? Romney = Kerry and the right hates Obama as much as the left hated Bush in 2004. Romney is a weak candidate with a weak campaign team. He. Will. Lose. Right, but if they were still drunk, this election would be a LANDSLIDE. The hangover is just making things slightly more interesting.

So if I'm reading this thread right: nobody here thinks Obama is running or ever will run a more superior campaign than Romney--assuming, of course that the mark of a superior campaign is in the ability to win an election. Okay. Well, we'll just sit back and see who wins.

Except we're not talking about primaries. We're talking about national elections for which there is a ton more data to crunch. I'd be interested to hear how he changed his formula to give him the "progressive" results he was looking for. I'm sorry I took an additional step on the first question that you didn't follow (for whatever reason): you asked if Obama's failure would make it easier or harder for the next African American to be elected. I responded by saying not everyone thinks he's been a failure (especially blacks). You're in a severe minority if you think Romney is the opposite of dull.

C'mon. Really? In an argument over the legitimacy of data you put a statistician up against a writer for a neoconservative rag? Prove it. I'll be happy to rescind.

You do understand the definition of rebuttal, yes? The McCain camp threw a hail Mary with Palin. They needed that hail Mary because of...OBAMA. Palin ended up costing more votes than she earned. Lieberman would not have had the same effect. And Nate Silver says Obama has a 68% chance of winning.

You say I'm wrong, then simultaneously confirm that Obama has painted Romney into a defensive corner on Bain. John McCain would have beaten a weaker Democratic candidate. Obama forced a tactical hand or two from the McCain camp. Again, I'm not ignoring certain enormously important factor (too many to list out while at work), but to say Obama didn't run a near perfect campaign (given the political latitudes of the time) is an opinion clouded in bias. What's your point? Question one: there won't many minds changed in this election, yours included, I gather. Just know that there are still a **** ton of Americans who do NOT share your opinion on the President, and see other barriers to success (laregely the GOP Congress) as more significant factors. That's not my opinion, that's just truth. Plus, if they can mobilize the black vote again, and there's no reason to think they can't, that's an entire demo they have completely locked up. Women too. I'm not saying these people are right or wrong to support Obama, but that doesn't change the fact that they do. Question two: well, what evidence do we have--other than his record breaking/Super Bowl winning performances--do we have that Tom Brady is a decent quarterback? To go a step further, I made the assessment of Obama's team in relation to Romney's. So, just as Obama's has proven themselves sharp, Romney's has proven themselves dull.

Look, I'm not voting for either one of these guys, so I don't want my perspective to be clouded by bias. Nothing either one of these guys will do is going to affect my life's trajectory. But, one thing I do know about is campaigning/messaging. Obama's squad got the first black president elected. Sure, there were other factors at play, but his campaigns have been very methodical and effective thus far, there's no reason to think they aren't two steps ahead of Romney. They've had a lot of time to prepare, and being the incumbent, they've got the advantage. There's little Romney can do at this point to alter their rollout plan. So when it comes to devising a strategy to get votes, I'll take Obama's team over Romney's any day.

You don't think that message just got a bit washed-out from Obama's so-called ineffectual ads? Obama beat him to the Bain punch, Romney is now defensive on the issue, just in time for people to tune it out. No, believe me, I get the broader point. See my response above.

And you think that will change minds?

So what?

No.

Hahaha, I had this exact same thought!

The husband of one of our firm's principals/CFO died suddenly last week. It's horribly sad and frightening the way he went, but my colleague (his wife) has been as strong and resilient as one could be through a tragedy like this, and she's working tirelessly to celebrate his legacy and his loves: golf, photography and the Ohio State University. We'll be attending his funeral tomorrow afternoon and on the back of our President/CEO's chair are about a half dozen OSU ties (seemingly equal to the number of gentlemen working in our office). I have no problem wearing one, in fact I'd be heavenly delighted to look upon my own funeral and see all the attendants donning Bills gear. But...one of our Senior Associates is a Michigan grad, and he's none to sure about the prospect of wearing anything that honors OSU. I don't have any strong college allegiances, but I wouldn't be terribly shook up if I had to wear a Patriots* tie if push came to shove. Perhaps I don't feel any rivalry as bitter as OSU v UM, so I put it to you. If you were him, would you suck it up and wear the Buckeyes tie?

Nicely put.

One HELL of a Canadian Tuxedo. (apologies to our northerly friends)

Was that Bruce Smith next to him??

HA! Don't hurt yourself patting your own back. I "shut up" more so out of exasperation, not defeat, big man.