November 5, 2012
"Romney 49%, Obama 48% in Gallup's Final Election Survey."
And: "After removing the 3% of undecided voters from the results and allocating their support proportionally to the two major candidates, Gallup's final allocated estimate of the race is 50% for Romney and 49% for Obama."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
81 comments:
Don't gloat, vote!!
My prediction: Chaos!
Right, but isn't Barry supposed to win all the swing states or something? I need to check in at the NYT to see what Nate Silver's Magic 8-ball says.
"Don't get cocky." -Han Solo
I need to check in at the NYT to see what Nate Silver's Magic 8-ball says.
God doesn't roll dice.
You all know what I'm going to say, so I won't bother.
God. The polls. So many polls. Polls tilting to the left. Polls rising. Polls falling. Polls rising. Poll after poll. Take a poll: Have you read all the polls? How likely are you to read all the polls? How likely are you to take a poll about polls? Hispanics take polls. Do Poles take polls? Do those Poles swing like polls swing? Are they a bloc? Blocs and polls. God.
"You all know what I'm going to say, so I won't bother."
Umm, not to burst your bubble, but no we all don't.
The incumbent remains under 50%. I forget, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Umm, not to burst your bubble, but no we all don't.
Okay, here's a hint: rhymes with "Sobama mill seal wit."
A pretty dramatic improvement for Obama since the last Gallup poll, which had Romney +5.
Note as well that Gallup has Obama up +3 among registered voters. The polls Gallup published throughout September were of registered voters; they switched to likely voters in early October. Plus 3 among registered voters is among Obama's best showings in the Gallup poll all year, comparable to where he was for most of September.
As for me, I'll check tomorrows poll.
Obama will heal zit?
Skew?
Looks like unbalanced, or whatever, it's really 51 - 47, but that may be me.
Coketown said...
God. The polls. So many polls. Polls tilting to the left. Polls rising. Polls falling. Polls rising. Poll after poll. Take a poll: Have you read all the polls? How likely are you to read all the polls? How likely are you to take a poll about polls? Hispanics take polls. Do Poles take polls? Do those Poles swing like polls swing? Are they a bloc?
Birds do it,
Bees do it,
Even educated fleas do it...
Poles in the polls do it
Even blogresses in their blogs do it
Apologies to Cole Porter.
Can't wait to hear the glorious sound of wingnut heads exploding tomorrow night. Once President Obama wins over the shape-shifter Romney, perhaps Althouse can focus on earning her taxpayer-funded salary (check out a number of WI public employee salary databases available). She should be spending more time in the classroom and less time fluffing the low-information voting crowd.
Obama will steal tit?
Obama will feel Mitt?
"Obama will steal tit?"
No, that would be the first black president, Bill Clinton.
"Don't gloat, vote!!"
Vote only if haven't already voted via early voting or by absentee ballot and then vote only once. If you're a dead Democrat, please don't vote.
Final Pew poll, Obama 50, Romney 47. Obama is up 13 points with women voters.
"No, that would be the first black president, Bill Clinton."
Feel tit, bite lip and then give medical tip. When not giving pleasure to many liberals, BJ Clinton was feeling our pain.
Fortunately, Wednesday morning this will (probably) be all over.
"Final Pew poll, Obama 50, Romney 47. Obama is up 13 points with women voters."
Well, that makes sense, he's the tit president after all . . .
Can't wait to hear the glorious sound of wingnut heads exploding tomorrow night.
Ah, the "revenge" vote. Is that all you people actually care about, sticking it to the "right-wingers"? It's telling that this seems to be the justification for many of you leftward dribblers. Not what's best for America, not who is most qualified to deal with our near-apocalyptic financial problems, no sense of possible reconciliatory feelings or desire to persuade people about ideas. Just tribalist "revenge".
perhaps Althouse can focus on earning her taxpayer-funded salary (check out a number of WI public employee salary databases available).
Ah, this old canard again! (Actually, not even a canard, since I like duck and duck is never boring or unwanted when served).
The law school faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison is entirely funded by student tuition. Aside from that, Althouse holds an endowed chair. Taxpayer money goes to fund your failing government schoolteachers, not law professors.
Get your facts correct before you attempt to snark, otherwise you seem like an asshole. Actually, you'd seem like an asshole even if you got the facts correct.
Well, that makes sense, he's the tit president after all . . .
I think of him more as the used tampon president...
Here's an interesting tidbit, from Paul Rahe.
"If, by chance, you think that Mitt Romney is going to lose tomorrow, let me suggest that you take a look at the data collected by Rasmussen on partisan identification over the last eight years. In October, 2008, he found that the Democrats had a 7.1 point advantage. In October, 2010, he found that the Democrats had a 2.9 point advantage. This October, however, he found that the Republicans had a 5.8 point advantage. If this is accurate, there will be a blow-out tomorrow."
Well, we shall see tomorrow. Unlike lefties, I do not gloat prematurely.
exile...do you know where you are posting>? Its been nothing but premature gloating for days now. See ya wednesday am.
I think the candidates present us with a fascinating dilemma over which direction to go.
With Obama and his supporters, it's all about the "fairness" obsession.
With Romney and his supporters, it's about pragmatism, about doing that we we think we know works.
I'll accept the will of the voters and try to make the best out of it no matter which way it goes. I've got my own opinion, but that doesn't count for much.
I don't follow every thread, but I'm surprised that I haven't seen anything from America's Politico on any of the threads I've read in the past few days.
Did the act get too tiresome?
"Why do they make it so hard for deployed military to vote? Does my ballot really have to be in a business size envelope? Can it not be in a personal size envelope? Do they know how hard it was to find a business size envelope? I have to run to the post office tomorrow to ensure it is postmarked on the 6th otherwise it is null and void!! "
"The Marines and Corpsmen out on convoys have no computer access to request ballots and when they do, its not good, slow. They have other concerns besides how difficult it is to vote, like getting blown up and shot at by our so-called allies. There should be some sort of voter outreach for all of us out here. Some way of making it easier instead of just brushing us under the rug."
6 hours ago · Like
This is what my daughter who is in Afghanistan posted on Facebook today. This stinks.
"Obama is up 13 points with women voters."
If I were a woman, I wouldn't be trumpeting this fact.
Inga,
They make it hard because they tend to vote Republican. If they got here illegally, and were likely to vote for a Democrat there would be no restrictions.
Voter suppression outrage: Wisconsin failing to send out military absentee ballots
No gmama3, this is why.
" Blogger mz said...
Can't wait to hear the glorious sound of wingnut heads exploding tomorrow night."
For a low information voter, you're pretty cocky.
I dunno, Inga. Why don't you ask Leon Panetta? Long time Dem congressman, WH Chief of Staff and now Secretary of Defense?
Inga, recent articles have highlighted the same problems from states like New York and New Jersey, well known 'winger bastions both.
Inga, all it would take would be an executive order from the CinC to streamline the procedures for military voting.
Why hasn't he done that?
Hell, the Navy has done it on its own regarding its personnel responding in the wake of Sandy.
In other words, Inga, this is nothing new, and tends to be mostly a problem when Democrats hold power in the Federal government.
As far as your daughter? Tough titty. I know plenty of sailors and Marines who got screwed on the vote who would have voted Republican. Why should your girl be any different.
You want to fix this, then start at the top.
With early voting, with so many people casting ballots before all of the relevant information is in, these last day poll results are really hard to factor into any conclusions as to results.
On O'Reilly tonight, Krauthammer said Romney would have won going away if the election had been held before Sandy hit, then there was those pictures with Christie, etc., and the pendulum swung Obama's way, but now the aftermath of the storm and the various governmental failures are all over the news, so Romney is coming back, though not yet to where he was.
Then Pat Cadell was on and told how Ford was ahead in the polls right up to election day in 1976, but when the folks actually got into the voting booth they got to thinking, "OMG, do we really want to keep this guy? Nixon pardon, and all?"
We will have to wait and see, but with all the swing states being this close - and some of that may be due to wishful thinking - tomorrow may indeed still turn out to be a "wave election."
"Obama is up 13 points with women voters."
If I were a woman, I wouldn't be trumpeting this fact.
I am a woman, and I am embarrassed by this fact.
I am embarrassed and angry that so many of my peers are bought off by condescending bullshit about silly social issues while being too immature and stupid to think for ten minutes about the nations's checkbook. Some women in this country act like trophy wives who just want to be bought furs and don't want to think for a minute about whether or not sugar daddy's money is going to last forever.
I'm looking forward to hearing Obama'a excuses after eight years.
"The economy Bush left me is even worse than I realized 4 years ago."
"Inga, all it would take would be an executive order from the CinC to streamline the procedures for military voting."
Because the military votes overwhelmingly for Republicans. The Dems have a long history of making it harder for the Military to vote.
Remember in 2000 the Dems went to court to deny the Military absentee ballots while they also were crying about voter disenfranchisement.
Actually, after eight years all he'll have to say is, "Suckers!".
As for O'Reilly's question about which state would be most satisfactory to turn Republican, my choice is New Mexico.
New Mexico has been written off by both parties as solid blue, so we have been blessedly saved from most of the advertising. The Republican Party has not wasted any money on Heather Wilson's Senate campaign, which is too bad; they should at least have run some showing Martin Heinrich - her opponent - and Harry Reid side by side, or morphing together, to point out that a vote for heinrich is also a vote for Harry Reid.
The Democrats have run some - made my males - doctoring Wilson's photos too make her look awful. I hope that just maybe a lot of NM women will take that personal and vote for Wilson just to spite the admakers!
As for the gender gap, it goes both ways...
Gallup shows men favor Romeny by 10 points.
Women favor Obama by 8 points.
Dreams it's Wisconsin municipalities that didn't send them by the deadline, not the Federal government. Has nothing to do with how they vote, our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al?
Inga,
gmama3 was right.
Suppression of the military vote is absolutely a common/constant Democrat tactic.
In the article you linked, it mentioned that only one of the campaigns had a lawyer representing the servicemembers...can you guess which campaign that was?
Hint: it wasn't the candidate whose last name is a vowel.
And what is the party affiliation of the person in charge of voting (and absentee ballots) for Wisconsin, the Secretary of State?
Doug La Follette, a Democrat.
He got into office with help from Democrat billionaire George Soros' "Secretary of State Project", which took as its principle the fact that what matters most in an election is who counts the vote. Soros' thought was with Democratic Party Secretaries of State across the US, they will always find ways to disqualify valid military votes but allow illegal alien/dead people votes, will adjudicate over/under votes in favor of the Democrat (like Al Franken) and always find just enough "misplaced" boxes of votes for Democrats in close elections (like Gregoire).
So blame your rich Democrat buddies for your daughter's difficulties in voting.
"I am embarrassed and angry that so many of my peers are bought off by condescending bullshit about silly social issues while being too immature and stupid to think for ten minutes about the nations's checkbook. Some women in this country act like trophy wives who just want to be bought furs and don't want to think for a minute about whether or not sugar daddy's money is going to last forever"
Not to worry, most women haven't bought into the Obama condescending bullshit, they're going to vote overwhelmingly for Romney along with most voters.
GOP if you do not lose tomorrow, we will bring REVENGE to your door-steps.
GOP: No need to vote. The election has been decided by the smartest people in the United Socialist America: The NYT, The Daily-Beast, The NPR, etc.
Just thank god that Obama will be the POTUS till January 2017.
Has nothing to do with how they vote, our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al?
Inga, I already addressed this (I was typing when you posted), but I'll repeat it for emphasis:
The Secretary of State of each state is in charge of voting.
Doug La Follette, a Democrat failed to ensure/enforce the rules being followed.
Sure, your daughter was going to vote for Obama and that is a lost Obama vote. But by finding ways to block military votes, for every Obama vote like your daughters that WI loses, it also discards 8 Romney votes.
That's what Democrats want.
You have grandchildren. You should be grown up enough to face reality by now.
Gallup shows men favor Romeny by 10 points.
I am a man, and I am embarrassed by this fact.
I am embarrassed and angry that so many of my peers are bought off by condescending bullshit about, oh, hell...not really.
As always, I'm a free agent and don't buy into identity politics.
"Dreams it's Wisconsin municipalities that didn't send them by the deadline, not the Federal government. Has nothing to do with how they vote, our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al?"
Okay, I take your point but I stand by my remarks concerning the Dems long history of military voter suppression at least as far back to the 2000 election.
"Inga said...
Dreams it's Wisconsin municipalities that didn't send them by the deadline, not the Federal government. Has nothing to do with how they vote, our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al?"
It has nothing to do with Walker, or his administration, or the GOP you dumb fuck.
I just heard Ann Coulter on Hannity making the case for the Bradley effect and I totally agree with her. People have been lying to the pollsters because they don't want to be thought racist by an anonymous pollster. In this election we've seen the Bradley effect on steroids
Nathan, honestly you are way too forward and personal with me, it's quite annoying and won't make me see things your way, most likely will do the opposite.
You seem to go out of your way to try to convince me to see the superiority of your politics and world view. You seem to want me to see the rationality of your opinions, not the way to go about it, if you want to win friends and influence people, so to speak.
Inga: No gmama3, this is why. #FAIL:
"The Romney campaign wrote in a letter that federal law requires election officials to send absentee ballots to military voters at least 45 days before a federal election. But at least 30 Wisconsin municipalities failed to send the ballots by the deadline of Sept. 22.
Hmmm, can see the way this one is breaking by who's pushing for ballot delivery.
Inga: ...our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al? #FAIL:
The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (G.A.Bis charged with oversight of Wisconsin's campaign finance, elections, ethics, and lobbying laws.
[..]
The G.A.B. is made up of six former judges, nominated by a panel of four Wisconsin Appeals Court judges, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The six board members serve staggered six-year terms...
...only two of which have been appointed by Gov. Walker.
"Inga said...
Dreams it's Wisconsin municipalities that didn't send them by the deadline, not the Federal government. Has nothing to do with how they vote, our administration is Republican, you know Scott Walker, et al?"
"It has nothing to do with Walker, or his administration, or the GOP you dumb fuck."
I don't know the facts so I'll have to abstain from any more commenting on this particular issue.
Alas Curious George, just being his monkey self, he can't help it. Poor little furry guy.
I disagree with Inga politics but she seems like a good person. Plus, I've learned that it isn't necessary to always get the last word.
Alas Curious George, just being his monkey self, he can't help it. Poor little furry guy.
Inga, are you psychotic?
You just lectured another commenter about getting too personal with you?
You do not seem to be in touch with the reality of what you do.
Gotta respect dreams for that. Big ups.
Inga may be a good person, but she is either incapable of self-awareness or she's on drugs.
Shouting Thomas, I was being nice to Monkey Boy, I could've been oh so much more personal and insulting, as he usually is towards me, calling him a furry little monkey was quite kind of me, considering.
And Shouting Tommy has anger management issues, is that too personal?
Hey Tommy it's election eve, wouldn't it be more fun to discuss who will show up here on Wednesday? Who will gloat and be jerks worse, Dems or Pubs?
Inga, you've got one of the worst failings of women.
You've got one notion of what you think is fair when you do it.
And, an entirely different notion of what you think is fair when it is done to you.
You consistently give yourself considerably greater latitude.
And Inga, you're also not too bright and you use the same shtick far too often.
The "people who disagree with me are angry" bit... you've overused it.
Find a new one.
Nathan, honestly you are way too forward and personal with me, it's quite annoying and won't make me see things your way, most likely will do the opposite.
You seem to go out of your way to try to convince me to see the superiority of your politics and world view. You seem to want me to see the rationality of your opinions, not the way to go about it, if you want to win friends and influence people, so to speak.
I don't really have any hope of convincing you of anything.
But I don't like how you use your daughter to try and seize the moral high ground from those who are currently actually in the military, who have personally deployed overseas and lived through enemy attacks. So that makes me particularly sensitive to your statements about politics related to military issues.
The rest of my responses are because I have something to say, and your statements are often the most appropriate introduction to the points I want to make.
So, I guess my responses are just one of the annoyances you have to deal with if you want to post here.
We all have to put up with annoyances to post here, too, so don't feel like you are being unfairly singled out.
Tommy, OK honey, whatever you say, I don't want to fight tonight.
Nathan, I don't mind you saying what you have to say in response to something I post, but you continually attempt to "get into my head", you make assumptions and treat me as if your assumptions are correct, when oftentimes they aren't even close.
But hey, yup thats your right, it's a discussion forum, anybody can say anything outlandish and expect to be taken seriously. I'm sure I've done it myself, guilty as charged.
I think you're a decent sort Nathan and I think that you would be surprised that I actually agree with you at times, not that it's important.
I speak of my daughter mostly because I am incredibly proud of her and we are very closely aligned in personality and our outlook on life. She is 40 years old, more like a friend to me than a daughter at this point. I don't make it a point to use her as a lever to gain in any political argument and if that has happened it wasn't intentional.
One more thought Nathan, it bothers me that some of you feel that anyone who is patriotic must belong to your Party, or be conservative. I know so many good Democratic families with sons and daughters who are serving, we love this country as much you folks here do and find it incredibly hurtful when our patriotism and especially that of our kids serving is called into question.
mz wrote: Can't wait to hear the glorious sound of wingnut heads exploding tomorrow night. Once President Obama wins ....
If President Obama wins the sound you will hear is the economy imploding as the dream that was America collapses.
Inga wrote: I know so many good Democratic families with sons and daughters ....
Democrats have sons and daughters? Have they noticed that the share of the national debt among those sons and daughters under 18 is over $200,000 apiece?
Just showed by 14-year old son my complete set of election choices. He was relieved. Of course my 13-year old daughter is aghast with some of my choices.
OMG! First time ever: Dixville Notch, NH, has a tied vote for president.
Seriously. 5-5.
Interesting that Gallup polled whether they approved of Obama's handling of Libya in the final poll. 39 percent approve and 52 percent disapprove.
rcommal, there ought to be a clause in the Constitution that if there is a tie, both candidates are banished to Elba and there's a new election.
@Peter w/r/t your allusion: LOL.
It's hard to figure the polls.
Either I don't understand this country and its recent history well at all, or the polls have failed badly this year.
my best friend's half-sister makes $63/hour on the laptop. She has been fired for 9 months but last month her payment was $20010 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site http://www.taz3.com
dreams said...
I disagree with Inga politics but she seems like a good person
You should pay closer attention. Those who whine that any criticism of themselves is questioning their patriotism while claiming the religious right intend to turn American women into sexual slaves aren't good people. They're loons.
Post a Comment