It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Politics/Legislation/Elections => Topic started by: Glock32 on October 19, 2012, 04:03:59 PM
-
So I've been hearing about these Marist polls showing Obama with something like a 6 or 8 point lead in Iowa. Never been there, don't know anyone from there. But what's the deal? How do they have so many Dumbocrats? I thought rural midwestern areas were mostly conservative.
I guess this is why I should just not even listen to or read anything about these polls. The fact that Rasmussen's is not showing the same Romney lead as Gallup makes me worry. I just cannot fathom why anyone would want four more years of this, and yet here we are with it going down to the wire.
-
Hmm...HotAir just put up a post (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/poll-romney-now-leads-by-one-in-new-hampshire-and-iowa/) about Romney now leading by one in Iowa.
Trust me, the BO is going to lose.
-
You're talking about a state that elected Harkin and Grassley to the US senate. They elected Branstad (conservative) and then Vilsack (stupid); then another dem and now back to Branstad.
There are some hardcore, grass roots conservatives but there are just as many libs--farmers who want someone to cater to them, university types who know more than anyone else, etc. They're everywhere!
Hmm...HotAir just put up a post (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/poll-romney-now-leads-by-one-in-new-hampshire-and-iowa/) about Romney now leading by one in Iowa.
Trust me, the BO is going to lose.
I do.
-
Hmm...HotAir just put up a post (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/poll-romney-now-leads-by-one-in-new-hampshire-and-iowa/) about Romney now leading by one in Iowa.
Trust me, the BO is going to lose.
I think you're right. I guess I just look at what has transpired since January 2009 and I am flabbergasted that the man gets even 30 votes.
-
Hmm...HotAir just put up a post (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/poll-romney-now-leads-by-one-in-new-hampshire-and-iowa/) about Romney now leading by one in Iowa.
Trust me, the BO is going to lose.
I think you're right. I guess I just look at what has transpired since January 2009 and I am flabbergasted that the man gets even 30 votes.
You and me both.
-
And then, of course, you have these guys (http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university) who say that Romney is going to get somewhere in the neighborhood of 330 electoral votes.
So there's your scientific analysis to go with my gut instinct.
-
And then, of course, you have these guys (http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university) who say that Romney is going to get somewhere in the neighborhood of 330 electoral votes.
So there's your scientific analysis to go with my gut instinct.
The state-by-state economic data used in their model have been available since 1980. When these data were applied retroactively to each election year, the model correctly classifies all presidential election winners, including the two years when independent candidates ran strongly: 1980 and 1992. It also correctly estimates the outcome in 2000, when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the election through the Electoral College.
hmmm, interesting
-
And then, of course, you have these guys (http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/10/04/updated-election-forecasting-model-still-points-romney-win-university) who say that Romney is going to get somewhere in the neighborhood of 330 electoral votes.
So there's your scientific analysis to go with my gut instinct.
Oh crap, and I was going to go with 333 (I just like the number!)...and these guys have to do an analysis... ::gaah::