BBC has posted an easy to use poll tracker, featuring a timeline and a way to compare different polls:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19415745
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19415745
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
2012 poll tracker
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
Werbung:
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
Polls are meaningless when the race is this tight. People will lie when asked questions - just because they are tired of the whole process. In this race, I think a lot of people don't like either candidate. Thus they might not vote; but they will give an opinion to the pollster. A lot of people are borderline either way, and some last minute event may sway their opinion - for example, people might think, "I don't like what Obama has done for 4 years, let's give the other guy a chance."
Polls don't measure the fickle behavior of human beings.
Polls don't measure the fickle behavior of human beings.
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
Then you can believe them. They are simply food for the political junkies. They serve no useful purpose.
they are mainly a toy for "news" organizations that positively live for elections.
for the rest of us they can serve as a tenuous indication of lean among the public.
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
I wonder if polls influence voters? How many people are confused who to vote for now that the polls are tied?
same number that live their lives confused.
How can the current polls be wrong?
One or the other is going to win. Which one, no one knows now. That's accurate, isn't it?
unless, of course, there really is a 269 to 269 tie.
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
People ask lots of questions about the U.S. Constitution, most of them starting with, "What if...?" Here's a good one: "What if... the Electoral College vote is a tie?" What if the 538 Electors sit down after the election and vote to a 269 to 269 tie?
House Selects the New President
As directed by the 12th Amendment, the 435 -- many of them brand new -- members of the House of Representatives would find as their first official duty the selection of the next President of the United States. "Welcome to Congress!"
Unlike the Electoral College system, where larger population equals more votes, each state in the House gets exactly one (1) vote when selecting the president. Even California, with its 53 Representatives, get one vote. The first candidate to win the votes of any 26 states is the new president. The 12th Amendment gives the House until the fourth day of March to select a president. Should the House fail to meet the deadline, well, more on that later.
It is up to the group, or "delegation" of representatives from each state to decide among themselves how their state will cast its one and only vote. Suddenly, smaller states like Wyoming, Montana and Vermont, with only one representative wield as much power as California or New York.
House Selects the New President
As directed by the 12th Amendment, the 435 -- many of them brand new -- members of the House of Representatives would find as their first official duty the selection of the next President of the United States. "Welcome to Congress!"
Unlike the Electoral College system, where larger population equals more votes, each state in the House gets exactly one (1) vote when selecting the president. Even California, with its 53 Representatives, get one vote. The first candidate to win the votes of any 26 states is the new president. The 12th Amendment gives the House until the fourth day of March to select a president. Should the House fail to meet the deadline, well, more on that later.
It is up to the group, or "delegation" of representatives from each state to decide among themselves how their state will cast its one and only vote. Suddenly, smaller states like Wyoming, Montana and Vermont, with only one representative wield as much power as California or New York.
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Openmind
Well-Known Member
Yes, but you see. . .for our delusional friends on the extreme Right, there was NO DOUBT that everyone except for a few "stupid people" hated Obama and wanted him gone. . .
Those delusional friends had vision of "landslide" for Romney the android, because, although NO ONE knows what Romney stands for, NO ONE knows how he would really govern, NO ONE knows whether he would return (again) to his "pro-choice" stand, he just wasn't OBAMA, and that should make him a clear winner. . .because everyone (in the extreme Right zombies' land) knows that EVERYONE (except a tiny minority of "stupid" people) wanted nothing more than to see Obama fail. . .after all, that has been the overwhelming focus of the GOP for 4 years. . .even before Obama took office, and they didn't even hesitate to put the country at risk in order to fulfill their desire to DEFEAT OBAMA!
So. . .how can it possibly so close!
Aren't you all suffering from a severe case of cognitive dissonance yet?
Hobo1
Well-Known Member
Your singing the same song we hear from Liberals every election... "you thought you were gonna win, but you have severe case of cognitive dissonance.
I have not read one post on this forum that thinks Romney was a sure winner. In fact, most non- Democrats have had big questions about Romney, and I never heard that someone say he was a sure thing.
I have not read one post on this forum that thinks Romney was a sure winner. In fact, most non- Democrats have had big questions about Romney, and I never heard that someone say he was a sure thing.
Yes, but you see. . .for our delusional friends on the extreme Right, there was NO DOUBT that everyone except for a few "stupid people" hated Obama and wanted him gone. . .
Those delusional friends had vision of "landslide" for Romney the android, because, although NO ONE knows what Romney stands for, NO ONE knows how he would really govern, NO ONE knows whether he would return (again) to his "pro-choice" stand, he just wasn't OBAMA, and that should make him a clear winner. . .because everyone (in the extreme Right zombies' land) knows that EVERYONE (except a tiny minority of "stupid" people) wanted nothing more than to see Obama fail. . .after all, that has been the overwhelming focus of the GOP for 4 years. . .even before Obama took office, and they didn't even hesitate to put the country at risk in order to fulfill their desire to DEFEAT OBAMA!
So. . .how can it possibly so close!
Aren't you all suffering from a severe case of cognitive dissonance yet?
Well, the partisans on both sides are saying that their team is going to win, even when the polls say it's a tossup. It's a lot like football fans telling the world that their team will win, when deep down they know that there's a good chance that they won't. Then, when their team loses, it's never because the other team was better. Instead, it's home team advantage, the refs were biased, someone had a bad day, whatever. In politics, it's the same: Regardless of who wins, the other team, I mean the real fans and cheerleaders, not the parties at large, will scream voter fraud, will say the voters were mislead, the refs (media) were biased, or it was the hurricane or something else that gave the other guys the home team advantage. It's comical, really. If your guy wins, it's because he got more electoral votes. If he loses, it's because he didn't get as many.
Werbung:
Cruella
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,311
Only if they were consistently picking up 75% to 25%.
I've seen several polls go my way and they didn't end up that way.
I remember the news media calling the race for Kerry too (not my pick), and I've read where Reagan won a landslide and Carter was up a week before the election.
