SammyBProvo, UTWhat this article failed to mention is that Gallup
explained that they were also using the older demographics and that the true
number likely have Romney up maybe as much as ten points. This is going to be a
landslide (depending on the amount of voter fraud). After a lot of analysis, my
numbers are crunched.I predict Romney will come in with at least 300
electoral votes. Landslide!!!10:13 p.m. Nov. 5, 2012=========== Cut & paste.Anything say can an will
be used against you.talk to ypu later SammyB
What this article failed to mention is that Gallup explained that they were also
using the older demographics and that the true number likely have Romney up
maybe as much as ten points. This is going to be a landslide (depending on the
amount of voter fraud). After a lot of analysis, my numbers are crunched.I predict Romney will come in with at least 300 electoral votes.
Most of the pollsters seem to believe that Democratic turnout and enthusiasm
will exceed the historic levels reached in 2008. RealClearPolitics has state by
state averages for all states, especially the battleground states. If you click
on the links showing the highest Obama advantage and actually drill down into
the polls, there is usually a D+7, D+8 or even D+11 advantage over Republicans.
Nate Silver from the NY times 538 blog is actually giving a higher weight to
these polls over Gallup and Rasmussen, despite the fact that the latter two were
among the most accurate over the past few election cycles.I simply
don't know how pollsters believe that the excitement level for Obama is
going to match or exceed what happened in 2008. I know many people who voted
for Obama last time who are enthusiastically supporting Romney this year.
Including my wife and I. Obama's tone this year (vote for revenge) is so
different than the hopeful message from 2008. I am cautiously
optimistic that Romney will get a high enough turnout to win tomorrow.
Oh, DN. Shilling for Romney until the very end.Meanwhile, the New
York Times 538 blog gives President Obama a 91.4% chance of winning tomorrow.
Guess we'll see who's right.
The article was a long way of saying LANDSLIDE. "President
Romney"... I like the sound of that. Just kind of rolls off the tongue.
We are in Utah, so how is this news? More people are born in this state that out
of towners that move here! So by reason of population, this would be the case.
I like Gallop... their data is usually pretty good...but..... there was a swing
in the Male to Female ratio of over 2 percent in just 8 years. Not likely...
and honestly per census data, it is frankly wrong. Mortality rates between
males and females just haven't changed that much. Why is this
important. Because it creates a constant. You know what they number should be,
and when the sample comes back different, you know there is a problem with the
data.Now, no, I don't think there is any covert intents here.
It is just a reminder to put everything in context. The truth is things
probably really haven't changed nearly as much as the report makes it
sound. Based on national census numbers, it is likely the most current numbers
are the closest to being accurate.... but you just never know.
1. Rasmussen Poll2. Rush Limbaugh's exclusive pollsterNeed we say more?....