THE BORE
General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: TVC15 on July 03, 2008, 04:38:14 AM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/01/cnn.poll.matchup/?iref=mpstoryview
I say if Nader blows this election, Triumph should vow to have an east coast EBer put him six feet under. It's only fair.
-
I dont think we need to worry about Nader:
(http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb165/mrangryface_bucket/original.jpg)
-
With the dust having finally settled after the prolonged Democratic presidential primary, a new poll shows Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama locked in a statistical dead heat in the race for the White House.
...
With just over four months remaining until voters weigh in at the polls, the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey out Tuesday indicates that among registered voters nationwide, Obama holds a 5-point advantage over the Arizona senator, 50 percent to 45 percent.
...
The poll, conducted June 26-29, surveyed 906 registered voters and carries a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
This is written by a professional no less. I could make these mistakes for half what he's paid!
-
One-quarter of all registered voters say Obama lacks patriotism, according to the poll. That breaks down to 10 percent of Democrats, 29 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans who say Obama lacks patriotism.
.smh
-
fivethirtyeight had a big rant a few days ago about sites that use phrases like 'statistical dead heat' incorrectly
-
he won't ruin shit. Gore lost the 2000 election; Nader didn't lose it for him. ::)
republicans are probably more worried about Barr than dems are worried about Nader (or Barr)
-
Yeah, I wouldn't read too much into it. In 2000 at this point, Nader was polling almost 10 percent and ended up getting maybe 3%. In 2004 he was polling the same (around 6%) and ended up getting maybe 1%. He's a non-factor, and I'm supporting Obama anyhow although to be honest I don't like some of the things he's had to say lately to pander to the middle and right. But oh well, that's the nature of the game.
-
Triumph isn't worried cause he thinks Obama is gonna win with 99% of the vote (including Texas LULZ) and the democrats are gonna take like 2 thousand seats in the house.
:lol :lol
-
Triumph isn't worried cause he thinks Obama is gonna win with 99% of the vote (including Texas LULZ) and the democrats are gonna take like 2 thousand seats in the house.
:lol :lol
No you shitburger, I don't think I've ever said he'd win with 99% of the vote. I *do* however think there's almost no way he can lose, and will win by a sizable margin. If I had to guess, I'd say it will play out:
Obama 53%
McCain 40%
Barr 6%
Nader 1%
And that the Dems will pick up 7-8 seats in the Senate and 20-25 in the House.
-
"no way" he can lose? :lol
dems are going to blitz the house and take 4-7 seats in the senate: that's a guarantee. whether they'll get in with Obama in the white house remains to be seen.
-
"no way" he can lose? :lol
dems are going to blitz the house and take 4-7 seats in the senate: that's a guarantee. whether they'll get in with Obama in the white house remains to be seen.
Right, keep saying things. You've proven to be oh so reliable and accurate in the past. Whoever won the Democratic nomination- Hillary, Obama, even Kucinich or some weird alternate reality happening like Hitler's reanimated corpse- was going to win the Presidency, you fucking dolt.
-
we'll see. nothing is a given but like i said: RIGHT NOW i'd rather be in obama's shoes than mccain's socks n sandals
-
What's that website where they use to-the-minute poll data to show the results of the electoral college? I'm just curious as to how that will play out... will we have the same thing as 2000 and 2004, with middle America and the south strongly red, and the election dependent on one or two swing states, or has the tide been turning in some states?
-
538 pretty much ripped to shreads the Barr Myth. Dude hasn't even raised $100k yet.
-
he won't ruin shit. Bush lost the 2000 election; Nader didn't lose it for him. ::)
.
-
he won't ruin shit. Bush lost the 2000 election; Nader didn't lose it for him. ::)
Is it 2000 again? Shit Let me bust out daikatana and and limp bizkit while we complain about the Gore/Bush recount again.
-
And that the Dems will pick up 7-8 seats in the Senate and 20-25 in the House.
Where are those 20-25 seats gonna come from? I can see maybe 5-8, but 20-25 is a significant number. That would put the REPs at under 180. I think the gerrymandering pretty much prevents things from getting that lopsided.
-
And that the Dems will pick up 7-8 seats in the Senate and 20-25 in the House.
Where are those 20-25 seats gonna come from? I can see maybe 5-8, but 20-25 is a significant number. That would put the REPs at under 180. I think the gerrymandering pretty much prevents things from getting that lopsided.
Have you been paying attention to the special elections that have happened in predominately Republican House districts where you guys are getting raped? Yeah. It might be easier in some places for a NAMBLA member to get elected than a Republican this November.
-
I bet the republicans just give up and let the democrats win. That's how easy the democrats have it. I mean why are we even having an election?
-
I bet the republicans just give up and let the democrats win. That's how easy the democrats have it. I mean why are we even having an election?
I dunno, I wonder why Lolbertarians even bother showing up.
-
I bet the republicans just give up and let the democrats win. That's how easy the democrats have it. I mean why are we even having an election?
I dunno, I wonder why Lolbertarians even bother showing up.
Showing up for what? And didnt you vote for Nader? :lol :lol
-
I bet the republicans just give up and let the democrats win. That's how easy the democrats have it. I mean why are we even having an election?
I dunno, I wonder why Lolbertarians even bother showing up.
Showing up for what? And didnt you vote for Nader? :lol :lol
Yup, and if I was faced with a shitty candidate again this year I would do so again in a heartbeat.
-
I bet the republicans just give up and let the democrats win. That's how easy the democrats have it. I mean why are we even having an election?
I dunno, I wonder why Lolbertarians even bother showing up.
Showing up for what? And didnt you vote for Nader? :lol :lol
Yup, and if I was faced with a shitty candidate again this year I would do so again in a heartbeat.
You just answered your own question.
I dunno, I wonder why Lolbertarians even bother showing up.
Yup, and if I was faced with a shitty candidate again this year I would do so again in a heartbeat
-
he won't ruin shit. Gore lost the 2000 election; Nader didn't lose it for him. ::)
Not mutually exclusive! (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477078/)
-
we all know you're a gore apologist/fanboy. let it go indy, let it go
-
What's that website where they use to-the-minute poll data to show the results of the electoral college? I'm just curious as to how that will play out... will we have the same thing as 2000 and 2004, with middle America and the south strongly red, and the election dependent on one or two swing states, or has the tide been turning in some states?
electoral-vote.com
-
Have you been paying attention to the special elections that have happened in predominately Republican House districts where you guys are getting raped? Yeah. It might be easier in some places for a NAMBLA member to get elected than a Republican this November.
Hence, my 5-8 pick ups for the DEMs. The Senate is where the ass-kicking will take place.
-
i think you have things backwards dude
-
i think you have things backwards dude
Per the usual, you're both wrong!
-
I don't expect Nader to do too well.
Obama has a lot of bases covered that Gore and Kerry did not in 2000 and 2004. Nader essentially is running as a protest vote but since there is a halfway decent candidate for the Democrats, I'm not sure why he is running. If it was Clinton, I probably would vote for Nader. He might get 0.5 to 1 percent of the popular vote.
Barr will do worse. Lolbertarians will talk about voting but will never get to the polls. I don't see them fawning over Bob Barr like they are Ron Paul so maybe he will get 0.5 percent or lower.
I also think that Gore did lose in 2000. If you could narrowly beat Bush by such a small margin, you don't deserve to run the country anyway.
Obama - 51%
McCain - 47%
Barr, Nader, Socialists, Nazis, etc. - 2%
-
Nader voters as a group only started pretending he didn't influence the election when it became clear how historically bad Bush was.
The line in 2000 was that both major candidates were basically indistinguishable, which ironically was the same narrative that dominated the corporate media that year and drove poor Bob Somerby insane.
-
Nader voters as a group only started pretending he didn't influence the election when it became clear how historically bad Bush was.
The line in 2000 was that both major candidates were basically indistinguishable, which ironically was the same narrative that dominated the corporate media that year and drove poor Bob Somerby insane.
I voted for Nader in 2000 and am still damn proud of it, even though fuck-o ended up as president. Gore could have tried to court potential Nader voters, but didn't. I am unrepentant about my vote....same for 2004. I do, however, have many friends who loved Nader in 2000 and suddenly started hating him in 2004.........finicky fucks.