I cannot speak for Mr. Dwight Howard's personal assistant, but If I lose, I will not make a new identity. No weaseling out. As I said, I keep my word.
Susquehanna poll (few days old) has Romney up 4 in PA... i don't believe it but... Spoiler we're going to need a bigger binder.
if you'll go back and look at my posts on this matter, you'll see I've been predicting a Romney victory w/ between 285-330 EVs. to pop vote is fun, but really just an indication of what's happening at the state level. the latter is one of the reasons i was predicting a month ago what polls now show nationally.
liberal PPP: <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Our Iowa poll tomorrow is going to be a whole lot better for Romney than the NBC one tonight</p>— PublicPolicyPolling (@ppppolls) <a href="https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/259061084428853248" data-datetime="2012-10-18T22:39:10+00:00">October 18, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
No, but we can create one where the Libs give each other's Hanging Chad a consolatory reach-a-round when Obama is one and done.
as i said above, i don't believe it (the data is a little old, among other things, and there's not a lot of other data to support such a result. but. Spoiler <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>RT @<a href="https://twitter.com/guypbenson">guypbenson</a>: Just spoke to Susquehanna's chief pollster in PA. Says the Romney 49 - Obama 45 poll is based on 1,376 LV with D+6 sample.</p>— Matthew DesOrmeaux (@cynicusprime) <a href="https://twitter.com/cynicusprime/status/259084060624830465" data-datetime="2012-10-19T00:10:28+00:00">October 19, 2012</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Lots of gold here. Let's check in with the FAMOUS CU study. Read more: CU professor: Model predicting Romney win was "wrong" - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_21953154#ixzz2BdzA62Hx Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
This piece is dead on: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-the-msm-and-failed-the-rank-and-file/264855/ Snippet: Barack Obama just trounced a Republican opponent for the second time. But unlike four years ago, when most conservatives saw it coming, Tuesday's result was, for them, an unpleasant surprise. So many on the right had predicted a Mitt Romney victory, or even a blowout -- Dick Morris, George Will, and Michael Barone all predicted the GOP would break 300 electoral votes. Joe Scarborough scoffed at the notion that the election was anything other than a toss-up. Peggy Noonan insisted that those predicting an Obama victory were ignoring the world around them. Even Karl Rove, supposed political genius, missed the bulls-eye. These voices drove the coverage on Fox News, talk radio, the Drudge Report, and conservative blogs. Those audiences were misinformed. Outside the conservative media, the narrative was completely different. Its driving force was Nate Silver, whose performance forecasting Election '08 gave him credibility as he daily explained why his model showed that President Obama enjoyed a very good chance of being reelected. Other experts echoed his findings. Readers of The New York Times, The Atlantic, and other "mainstream media" sites besides knew the expert predictions, which have been largely born out. The conclusions of experts are not sacrosanct. But Silver's expertise was always a better bet than relying on ideological hacks like Morris or the anecdotal impressions of Noonan.
when every post you make has a twitter reference in it, its no wonder you area always wrong. How on earth are you so stupid?
sam, its like you said in the what will GOP do thread. these guys are in their own vacum. i've been without cable for a few months, but i saw that scarborough lost a bet with axelrod where he has to grow a mustasche. I really can't believe that these guys talked themselves into thinking romney was almost a sure thing
