politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Election Predictions
Source:
Dissenting Opinions
URL Source: http://jwpegler.blogspot.com/2012/11/election-predictions.html
Published: Nov 3, 2012
Author: jwpegler
Post Date: 2012-11-03 19:26:29 by jwpegler
Keywords: None
Views: 40211
Comments: 65
We are three days away from one of the two most consequential elections in my lifetime (along with 1980). So, it's time to go out on a limb and make my predictions for what is likely going to happen. Presidency Mitt Romney will be elected the next President of the United States. No President since Franklin Roosevelt has won reelection with the unemployment rate above 7.2%. No President ever has won reelection with a smaller share of the vote than he got when originally elected to the Presidency... and no one anywhere argues that Obama will get more than the 52.9% of the vote he got in 2008. The country has been in a sour mood for about four years now. Obama will pay the price, just like McCain did in 2008. They will have both paid the price for denying that the country is in dire economic straights. The big difference between McCain and Obama is that Obama is in charge of the country's troubles. Yes, there are a couple of polls (Quinnipiac and Marist) that show Obama with a substantial lead. However, those polls have unrealistic turnout models. They are both projecting Democrat turnout at or above the record 2008 levels, when people who have never voted before, and may never vote again, turned out to elect America's first black President. We are not going to see an 8 point Democrat advantage in turnout this year. Averaging the 2004, 2006, 2008, and 2010 turnouts gives the GOP a 1% advantage in turnout. This would turn Obama's 5% lead in the Quinnipiac poll into a 4% Romney lead. In addition, in every poll, Romney is leading among independent voters. Romney will get somewhere between 271 and 331 votes. I have a bunch of very realistic models that predict this range. It will definitely not be a landslide like Nixon or Reagan. But unseating a sitting President will be enough to give him the mandate he needs to get the economy back on track. There is a small chance that Romney will win the popular vote, but Obama will win the electoral vote. This is an increasingly popular fantasy with the mainstream media, who are desperate to see Obama re-elected. This scenario had some credibility 2 to 3 weeks ago. But probably no longer. House Republicans will retain control of the House. There is no question about this at all. The GOP could lose up to 5 seats. If Romney wins, they could gain up to 5 seats. Given their advantage with the last redistricting, the GOP should easily pick up 20 to 25 seats. They won't. It demonstrates how incompetent the House GOP "leadership" really is. Senate The Senate should have been a blowout in favor of the GOP this year. There are twice as many Democrat seats up for grabs than Republican seats, and the country is in a sour mood. Unfortunately, like 2010, the GOP nominated many of the wrong people. In 2010, the GOP nominated and won with great people like Rand Paul. However, they also got their ass kicked with the witch from Delaware and the religious kook from Nevada. If the various Tea Parties want to have a sustained positive influence on the country, they need to be able to distinguish between GREAT reformers like Rand Paul and self-serving kooks like Christine O'Donnell. This year, the GOP could have easily won Senate races in Indiana and Missouri. Yet, the are struggling because the GOP candidates in both states made idiotic comments about rape. It's a message to the Tea Parties -- not to be more "moderate", but to be more discerning (selective) about the people they support. The Senate will be tight -- a small Democrat majority is very likely, but a small Republican majority is still possible, in spite of the GOP's idiocy. My prediction is that the Democrats will barely retain control.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: jwpegler, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#0)
(Edited)
You've set the bar far too low, by picking that self serving globalist k00k, neocon MitTard, bushbot. I'm sticking with my long standing prediction that Romney will lose, because he's the bigger a$$hole. East coast flooding will persist longer than expected due to the tears of Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, John Crybaby Boehner, and The Donald. They'll be whining about voter fraud, and PaulTARDS. Progressive neocon MitTard whities, will riot and burn the MSNBC and PBS studios, Planned Parenthood, and a few gay KFC's. Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
No. Your long standing "prediction" is that the "globalists" have destined an Obama win and that Romney is complacent. Romney is just getting paid off to lose. THAT is your long standing prediction. You've posted it on this board and others many times. Consequentially, you are a KOOK.
BS! Prove it, kook. But lets stick to the topic, and not go off on your yukon tangent. People don't like Mitt, or Obama. Both of their records SUCK!
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
It really is that simple. They're both corrupt, so no matter which sock-puppet wins, AMERICA loses. These idiots who fall into that "lesser of two evils" argument have been doing the same stupid shit since at least four decades, and look where it's gotten us. IDIOTS.
Excellent post and good analysis..I agree with much that you have written. The GOP had a chance to drive a stake through Harry Reid's heart in 2010 but chose the wrong 'vampire killer' to get the job done. Let's hope history doesn't repeat itself and at least Reid can be relegated to minority status.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ Nate Silver's record speaks for itself.
Moron alert.
The moron who thinks crack is a good thing and should be legal. Another moron alert.
You're just like Elmo, except with a RomneyPhone that spells America wrong. That's why Willie-Mitt is a bigger a$$hole! Hates America so much, that he refuses to spell it correctly. It's AMERICA, love it or leave it! Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
Obummer will win because real conservatives won't vote for Massachusetts Mitt,and the "great undecided" that are the ones that really determine who wins elections won't vote for a Dim with a R behind his name when they have a real Dim to vote for. If you want to beat an incumbent you have to give the voters a choice. Something new to vote for instead of the same thing in a different package.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
No,he will lose because it's safer to deal with the asshole you already know and understand than it is to deal with a new and unknown asshole. AND....,just how gullible do you have to be to think a former Governor of Massachusetts is a conservative?
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
Nate Silver's record speaks for itself. Yes it does. In 2010, he projected the GOP would pick up 54 seats in the House. They picked up 63 seats - - a whopping 17% difference. In 2010, there were only 4 close Senate races (Colorado, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Alaska). Silver got 3 of the 4 (75%) wrong. For example, Silver predicted that Sharron Angle was going to win Nevada by 3 points. Harry Reid won by 5.5% - - that's a huge 8.5% difference. This year, he gave Santorum an 18% chance of winning the Iowa Caucus and Romney a 44% of winning. Santorum basically tied Romney with 25% of the vote. Silver is NOT infallible. He is going to be wrong again this year.
indeed. Consider Nate Silver's 2010 track record: He correctly predicted 34/36 Senate seats whose outcomes were resolved by November 4, 2010 He predicted a net gain of 54 seats in the House for Republicans (the House actually gained 63 Republicans) Nate correctly predicted the outcome in 36 of 37 gubernatorial elections Importantly, even the elections that Nate got wrong were with in his published margins of error -- i.e., the candidate was projected to get 50.5% of the vote +/- 1.5%, but got 49.5%; it's technically 'wrong' (wrong candidate won), but still a very good prediction. Really, the best measure of Silver's accuracy would be to compare how often reality fell within his margin of error bars; better yet, how often reality fell within his error margins compared to others. http://www.quora.com/Nate-Silver/How-many-House-Senate-and-Governor-races-did- the-NYTs-Nate-Silver-correctly-predict-winners-for-versus-other-well-kno
Silver is using polls JW pointed out are skewed to the 2008 +8(D) model. That model is not valid. Notice how he mentions "you would have to skew the polls to get a Romney lead?" The skew is what is in favor of Obama. Those enthusiastic students and inner city crack heads are not heading to the polls this year.
"Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.) Psalm 139:16
Well, God knows what a *raving* success the "War on Drugs" has been, eh, stone? Pfft. Yeah, I should vote for evil, and have done with it, eh? Twit.
google.com I'm not your secretary. Do your own research, bozo.
WOW. We really needed a guru to predict that Barbara Boxer was going to win yet again... What great insight he provided! In the 4 Senate races that were competitive in 2010, Silver was wrong 3 times -- a whopping 75% failure rate. He got the Nevada race wrong by 8.5 points -- he said Sharon Angel would win by 3 points and she lost by 5.5 points. Yep, what a "guru" he really is. Silver has a blog in the New York Times, as does the economic "guru" Paul Krugman, whose head is stuck in the 1930s. They are both cracked.
If you and Hondo are the only "real" conservatives in the country, you may be right. But the rest of us conservatives and libertarians are going to get rid of the black liberationist, leftist, anti-capitalist, academic buffoon that is now occupying the White House.
The latest CNN poll, which shows Romney and Obama tied, has a +11 Democrat turnout. The "historic" election of 2008 only had Obama had +7 or +8 Democrat. Almost all of the pollsters are ignoring the historic 2010 election, when the GOP gained 63 seats in the House, 600+ seats in State Legislatures across the country, and more... Traditionally, pollsters look at Presidential election years differently than they do off year elections. BUT 2010 was so important that they shouldn't ignore it. Yet, they are. That will be why they are wrong.
You can't be either a conservative or a libertarian and vote for a former Governor of Massachusetts. Go ahead and vote for anybody you want for whatever reason or reasons you want,but don't try to pretend it is because of your conservative principles because they have nothing to do with it.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
SMACK!!! I think that's gonna' leave a mark on his empty little skull... LOL. SMACK!!! Damn, son... you're on a roll!!! LMAO!!! No, he wants to be on the "winning" team... like some couch-potato "sportsman" roots for his favorite pro-wrestler... Without noticing that it's all theater. How stupid must one be, to keep believing an in-your-face lie??? Amazing... truly.
By the time the presidential race is called in Ohio..... which I'm guessing will be around 8:00 PM.... The presidential race will be over. The Sitting President will be re-elected. IMHO
I've been a libertarian long before you even started thinking about the world around you. I'll bet that I am younger than you are as well. Humans are not perfect. There is no perfect world. The only people who disagree with this are communists and Ayn Rand fanatics. I am neither. Romney is not a professional politician. He is a business guy. I was the CTO at a joint venture between two technology powerhouses. We grew the company from nothing to $800 million a year in revenue before I left. I was the technology guy from one company. The CEO was the business guy from another company. The more I look at Romney, the more I see our CEO -- pragmatic and willing to do whatever it takes to help the organization succeed. I didn't support Romney in the GOP primary. I supported Ron Paul. I was elected a Ron Paul delegate to our district convention. But, Ron Paul is not in this election. His political career is over. Writing his name him demonstrates a slavish devotion to a cult of personality that is characteristic of the Ayn Rand CULT. Ron Paul is NOT a cultist. He would not approve of this behavior. I hated the Bush's. I voted for Ron Paul in 88. I voted for Ross Perot in 92. I was so angry at Bush's war in Iraq that I voted for Ralph Nader in 2004. This year is different. Is Romney a libertarian hero who will slash and burn government? No. But he is also not an anti-American, leftist, black liberarationist, who is hell bent on seeking "revenge" on America. There is a HUGE difference this year. Only kooks from the Ayn Rand cult don't get it.
which I'm guessing will be around 8:00 PM.... IMHO ALL polling places in the nation should be closed at the same time and no votes reported until they have all be counted.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
BullBush! He grew up in a political family,and has worked to be president for years. Amateurs don't get elected to be Governors unless it is some kind of freak show when the pro-wrassler was elected in Mn. But you just keep on thinking that if that's what it takes to get you through the night.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
I completely understand your point of view -- anyone who even thinks of running for office is a tool of the "global elite". You are as much of a simpleton as the leftist global warming buffoons.
You are as much of a simpleton as the leftist global warming buffoons. You don't even suspect anything,much less understand it. You are blinded by your own desperation and ego. The only good news for you is you will be able to hold on to your illusions of brilliance by blaming people like me for Rombama's loss tomrorrow,instead of blaming the RNC for backing your favorite globalist.
A wise man once said,"If you wish to live your life as a good man,try to be the man your dog thinks you are."
And yet that is exactly what may end up happening..especially if the GOP gains control of the Senate. Romney may surprise his skeptics by advocating for big cuts if there is a clear path to gaining legislative approval.
dumbshit: I've been a libertarian long before you even started thinking about the world around you. I'll bet that I am younger than you are as well. Disinformation Tactic #4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent’s argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Disinformation Tactic #12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues. And so on... Disinformation Tactic #8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough “jargon” and “minutiae” to illustrate you are “one who knows”, and simply say it isn’t so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources. Disinformation Tactic #11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the “high road” and “confess” with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made - but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, “just isn’t so.” Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for “coming clean” and “owning up” to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues. Disinformation Tactic #5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as “kooks”, “right-wing”, “liberal”, “left-wing”, “terrorists”, “conspiracy buffs”, “radicals”, “militia”, “racists”, “religious fanatics”, “sexual deviates”, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues. Disinformation Tactic #8. Invoke Authority... (see above) Disinformation Tactic #11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. (see above) Disinformation Tactic #12. Enigmas have no solution. (see above) Thanks for playing. What I've just demonstrated, is that you're a fucking LIAR and a FOOL. You're a mealy-mouthed, dimwitted sack-o'-shit. You're the exact kind of fool that has allowed our country to go to HELL. There's absolutely NO difference between you and Lyin' Brian, loonyming or any of the other blind and STUPID sheeple. You fucking disgust me. You are a fucking coward. And no matter HOW you try to spin it, that's what you are... and that's ALL you are.
Just saying... That said...I didn't think this would be such a 'blow-out'... Surprised me, indeed!
It is not easy reconstructing 'molded minds'... at 11:20 EST Mr. Silver's map is identical to the national results.... I'd say his methods are quite sound.
Triumph of the Nerds: Nate Silver Wins in 50 States http://mashable.com/2012/11/07/nate-silver-wins/
See, this thread here is a percect example of your kookery. You were told time after time, by people much smarter than you are, but you refused to listen. This right here is what makes you a KOOK.
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
Uh huh. Is that a fact?
He seems smarter than you.
He seems smarter than you. I don't do this for a living. He does.
An amateur k00k, but still a k00k!
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
I was right on the House and the Senate. Why wasn't I right about the Presidency? Obama spent $300 million on television ads in the battle ground states over summer painting Romney as some kind of Simon Legree who wants to tie women up and throw them on the railroad tracks. And Romney just didn't response. He let Obama define him. People didn't get a good look at Romney until the debates. He started picking up momentum. But then the hurricane took the election off of the news for 5 days in the last week or so of the election. It stopped Romney's momentum. The Obama campaign were a bunch of bare knuckle brawlers who were willing to say anything to remain in power. Romney refused to jump in the gutter with them. That's why he lost. You didn't even play. You just sat their and masturbated over Ron Paul. Like the rest of, you'll now pay the price with a socialist healthcare system, a decimated energy industry, at least $21 trillion in debt, and so many people on the government dole that we'll never be able to turn the country around. OH, I did get one more prediction right -- Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode COMBINED did not get 1% of the vote. Nice job, asshole.
Comments (41 - 65) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestGREAT reformers like Rand Paul and self-serving kooks
Sheriff Joe and Virgil Goode. Not reconquistas, like Barry and Mitt
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#2. To: hondo68 (#1)
I'm sticking with my long standing prediction that Romney will lose, because he's the bigger a$$hole.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#3. To: jwpegler, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#2)
(Edited)
You've posted it on this board and others many times.
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#4. To: hondo68 (#3)
People don't like Mitt, or Obama. Both of their records SUCK!
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#5. To: jwpegler (#0)
#6. To: jwpegler (#0)
#7. To: hondo68 (#1)
because he's the bigger a$$hole.
#8. To: Capitalist Eric (#4)
#9. To: A K A Stone, *Ron Paul for President* (#7)
(Edited)
Moron alert. 
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#10. To: jwpegler (#0)
#11. To: hondo68 (#1)
Romney will lose, because he's the bigger a$$hole.
#12. To: Jameson (#6)
(Edited)
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#13. To: jwpegler (#12)
Please cite your source.....
#14. To: jwpegler (#12)
Silver is NOT infallible.
#15. To: Jameson, jwpegler (#14)
#16. To: A K A Stone (#8)
The moron who thinks crack is a good thing and should be legal.
Another moron alert.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#17. To: Jameson (#13)
(Edited)
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#18. To: Jameson (#14)
(Edited)
He correctly predicted 34/36 Senate seats
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#19. To: sneakypete (#10)
Obummer will win because real conservatives won't vote for Massachusetts Mitt
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#20. To: redleghunter (#15)
Silver is using polls JW pointed out are skewed to the 2008 +8(D) model. That model is not valid.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#21. To: jwpegler (#19)
But the rest of us conservatives and libertarians
#22. To: sneakypete (#21)
You can't be either a conservative or a libertarian and vote for a former Governor of Massachusetts.
Go ahead and vote for anybody you want for whatever reason or reasons you want,but don't try to pretend it is because of your conservative principles because they have nothing to do with it.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#23. To: jwpegler (#0)
Election Predictions
#24. To: sneakypete (#21)
(Edited)
You can't be either a conservative or a libertarian and vote for a former Governor of Massachusetts.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#25. To: Jameson (#23)
By the time the presidential race is called in Ohio.....
#26. To: jwpegler (#24)
Romney is not a professional politician.
#27. To: sneakypete (#26)
Amateurs don't get elected to be Governors
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#28. To: jwpegler (#27)
I completely understand your point of view -- anyone who even thinks of running for office is a tool of the "global elite".
#29. To: jwpegler (#24)
(Edited)
Is Romney a libertarian hero who will slash and burn government? No.
#30. To: jwpegler (#24)
sneakypete: You can't be either a conservative or a libertarian and vote for a former Governor of Massachusetts.
Humans are not perfect. There is no perfect world.
He is a business guy. I was the CTO at a joint venture between two technology powerhouses. We grew the company from nothing to $800 million a year in revenue before I left. I was the technology guy...
I didn't support Romney in the GOP primary. I supported Ron Paul. I was elected a Ron Paul delegate to our district convention. But, Ron Paul is not in this election. His political career is over.
Writing his name him demonstrates a slavish devotion to a cult of personality that is characteristic of the Ayn Rand CULT.
He would not approve of this behavior.
I hated the Bush's. I voted for Ron Paul in 88. I voted for Ross Perot in 92. I was so angry at Bush's war in Iraq that I voted for Ralph Nader in 2004.
Is Romney a libertarian hero who will slash and burn government? No. ut he is also not an anti-American, leftist, black liberarationist, who is hell bent on seeking "revenge" on America.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#31. To: jwpegler, Not to later to revise your prediction... (#0)
#32. To: jwpegler (#18)
Silver was wrong 3 times -- a whopping 75% failure rate.
#33. To: jwpegler (#18)
Yep, what a "guru" he really is.
#34. To: jwpegler (#0)
#35. To: jwpegler (#0)
Mitt Romney will be elected the next President of the United States.
#36. To: jwpegler (#18)
Silver has a blog in the New York Times, as does the economic "guru" Paul Krugman, whose head is stuck in the 1930s. They are both cracked.
#37. To: meguro (#36)
Silver has a blog in the New York Times, as does the economic "guru" Paul Krugman, whose head is stuck in the 1930s. They are both cracked.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#38. To: jwpegler, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#37)
I don't do this for a living.
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#39. To: We The People (#34)
(Edited)
See, this thread here is a percect example of your kookery.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#40. To: hondo68 (#38)
(Edited)
An amateur k00k, but still a k00k!
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]