How Obama Got Elected

I know I'm embarrassed by some of my fellow Obama supporters, there's no doubt of that. And if I had remained Republican, I would be embarrassed by some of my fellow McCain supporters too.

There are some pretty ignorant, poorly educated Democrats out there. There are some pretty ignorant, poorly educated Republicans out there.

To take the words of 12 stupid people and apply it with a broad brush is bad reporting at minimum. To take the words of 12 stupid people and believe they are representative of a particular group is ignorant.
Actually it was 512 people which is statistically significant.

And the people weren't stupid, but ignorant of the facts (ignorant in the descriptive sense rather than the insult). Over 1/2 had college degrees. Almost all had HS degrees.

I agree with the posters that say this wasn't the only reason. There were a lot of reasons, including Bush, the way McCain's campaign was run (whether it was his choices or not), the way Obama's campaign was run (extremely well, I have to say), the way the MSM did not report on Obama as much as they tried to be "part of his history", etc. (Rich, much of the media over here, at least at the national level, ARE Democrats. There was one major commentator that was quoted as saying he didn't know anyone who voted for Reagon when Reagon won in 1984, one of the largest landslides in our history).

I disagree that Palin was a reason that Obama won. Heck, one of the knocks on Palin wasn't anything she said at all, but what Tina Fey said while portraying her. 87% of those asked in that poll couldn't tell the difference. And that number I do believe.
 
Actually it was 512 people which is statistically significant.

And the people weren't stupid, but ignorant of the facts (ignorant in the descriptive sense rather than the insult). Over 1/2 had college degrees. Almost all had HS degrees.

I agree with the posters that say this wasn't the only reason. There were a lot of reasons, including Bush, the way McCain's campaign was run (whether it was his choices or not), the way Obama's campaign was run (extremely well, I have to say), the way the MSM did not report on Obama as much as they tried to be "part of his history", etc. (Rich, much of the media over here, at least at the national level, ARE Democrats. There was one major commentator that was quoted as saying he didn't know anyone who voted for Reagon when Reagon won in 1984, one of the largest landslides in our history).

I disagree that Palin was a reason that Obama won. Heck, one of the knocks on Palin wasn't anything she said at all, but what Tina Fey said while portraying her. 87% of those asked in that poll couldn't tell the difference. And that number I do believe.

Wow...cons sure do get style points for doing everything possible to come up with a reason why there whole philosophy was rejected soundly in both 2006 and again in 2008....lets review these POLL results

North Carolina......red to BLUE

Virginia......red to BLUE

Colorado....red to BLUE

Indiana....red to BLUE

Ohio....red to BLUE (despit Joe the non-plumbers ample influence)

New Mexico....red to BLUE

Iowa...red to BLUE

Florida....red to Blue


Case closed!!!....color it any way you want to to make it easier on the psyche, but this nation has spoken loudly. What should not be underestimated is this relatively young mans ability to move the masses with his words AND his deeds. He ran as close to a perfect campaign as one could, and he has flipped the electoral map in this country!!
 
Actually it was 512 people which is statistically significant.

Where do you get that from? Sample size is only a part the calculation of significance. It also depends on the power you want, the alpha error you are willing to accept, the estimate variance in the underlying population and the precision with which you want your answer.

Plus, you still wouldn't know about external (or even internal) validity and whether you could apply your results to the population as a whole. How many people did they have to phone to get 512 to answer their questions? Were those that accepted different from those that said no? Were the people that they called representative off all Obama voters?

Given the size of the voting population in the US, it would take a very carefully design study to ensure external validity and/or statistical significance with 512 people.

That's not even getting into the poor design of the poll. The question they actually asked was "Do Obama voters know more about what was in the media in the past 6 weeks about Palin than they did about Obama/senate issues that were either never in the media or occurred years ago?"
 
Wow...cons sure do get style points for doing everything possible to come up with a reason why there whole philosophy was rejected soundly in both 2006 and again in 2008....lets review these POLL results

North Carolina......red to BLUE

Virginia......red to BLUE

Colorado....red to BLUE

Indiana....red to BLUE

Ohio....red to BLUE (despit Joe the non-plumbers ample influence)

New Mexico....red to BLUE

Iowa...red to BLUE

Florida....red to Blue


Case closed!!!....color it any way you want to to make it easier on the psyche, but this nation has spoken loudly. What should not be underestimated is this relatively young mans ability to move the masses with his words AND his deeds. He ran as close to a perfect campaign as one could, and he has flipped the electoral map in this country!!

ELECTORAL MAP: 2004

2004ElectoralMap.gif


I remember the day after the 2004 election somebody posted the first picture. He commented how BEAUTIFUL all that RED was!!! :lmao:



ELECTORAL MAP: 2008

statemapredbluer512.png
 

Much like the Bush supporters over the past 8 years have told me, I'll tell the same thing to the McCain supporters.

Get over it. Our candidate won, your candidate lost.
 
Actually it was 512 people which is statistically significant.

And the people weren't stupid, but ignorant of the facts (ignorant in the descriptive sense rather than the insult). Over 1/2 had college degrees. Almost all had HS degrees.


I disagree that Palin was a reason that Obama won. Heck, one of the knocks on Palin wasn't anything she said at all, but what Tina Fey said while portraying her. 87% of those asked in that poll couldn't tell the difference. And that number I do believe.


Oh .....right.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3489Kq0MZP4&feature=related

default.jpg
 
Much like the Bush supporters over the past 8 years have told me, I'll tell the same thing to the McCain supporters.

Get over it. Our candidate won, your candidate lost.

but ours REALLY won!!! :lmao:
 
From Nate silver at fivethirtyeight.com

Zogby Engages in Apparent Push Polling for Right-Wing Website

UPDATE: For additional context about the survey and an exclusive interview with John Ziegler, please see here.

The conservative website HowObamaGotElected.com reports that it has commissioned Zogby International to conduct a poll of 512 Barack Obama voters as part of what can best be described as a viral marketing effort to discredit the intelligence of Obama supporters.

The website, created by former radio talk show host John Ziegler to promote a forthcoming documentary, features a YouTube clip of interviews with 12 Obama voters who "were chosen for their apparent intelligence/verbal abilities and willingness to express their opinions to a large audience". The clip portrays the Obama supporters as giving "incorrect" answers to political questions such as "which candidate said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket". Of the 12 Obama supporters interviewed for the clip, 7 (58%) are black; nationwide, about 23% of Obama supporters were black according to the national exit poll.

In connection with the YouTube clip, Ziegler describes that he "also commissioned a Zogby telephone poll which asked the very same questions (as well as a few others) with similarly amazing results." Partial results of the survey from among 512 Obama voters are reported on the website. It is not clear if voters for non-Obama candidates were screened out by the survey, or Ziegler has chosen not to report their results.

Most of the questions on the survey take the form of a multiple choice political knowledge test, stating a "fact" to the respondent and asking them which of the four major candidates (Obama, McCain, Biden, Palin) the statement applies to. Questions include the following:

"Which of the four [candidates] said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket?"

"Which of the four [candidates] started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground?"

"Which of the four [candidates] quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism?"

"Which of the four [candidates] won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot?"

As should be obvious, the veracity of several of these claims is -- at best -- debatable, yet they are apparently represented as factual to the respondent. It is not clear whether the respondent is informed of the "correct" response after having had the question posed to him.

Not all of the items in the poll are intended to apply to Obama or Biden. Several apply to Sarah Palin, although the items about Palin, while probably unflattering ("which of the four [candidates] has a pregnant teenage daughter?") are nevertheless apparently true. The exception is a "twist" question about Palin in which the respondent is asked "which candidate said that they can see Russia from their house?". Ziegler claims in the video that none of the four answers is correct because the statement was made by Tina Fay rather than Sarah Palin. (In her interview with Charlie Gibson, Palin said that "you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska", not that she can see Russia from her house.)

To my mind, this survey meets the definition of a "push poll", which the Random House Dictionary defines as "a seemingly unbiased telephone survey that is actually conducted by supporters of a particular candidate and disseminates negative information about an opponent." That (i) several of the items on the survey contain information which, in addition to being negative, is arguably also untrue; (ii) Ziegler brags that the survey includes a trick question to which no correct answer can be provided, and that (iii) apparently only Obama voters were targeted by the survey (although this is not 100 percent clear), also inform my opinion that the survey can fairly be described as a "push poll".

In an item on his personal website dated today, 11/18, Ziegler claims that Zogby will officially release the results of the survey tomorrow. Ziegler also appeared on Fox's Hannity & Colmes news program yesterday (11/17) to promote his documentary, on which clips from the YouTube video were shown.

Why Zogby International has decided to accept this client and conduct a survey in this fashion is not clear. I would hope, however, that any and all clients that need legitimate polling work conducted would take their business elsewhere. These clients include C-SPAN and Reuters, two organizations with longstanding and well-deserved reputations for accuracy and neutrality; contact information for C-SPAN and Reuters can be found at their respective webpages.

There's More...

Contract Post

-- Nate Silver at 2:40 AM 200 Comments...
 
Wow...cons sure do get style points for doing everything possible to come up with a reason why there whole philosophy was rejected soundly in both 2006 and again in 2008....lets review these POLL results

North Carolina......red to BLUE

Virginia......red to BLUE

Colorado....red to BLUE

Indiana....red to BLUE

Ohio....red to BLUE (despit Joe the non-plumbers ample influence)

New Mexico....red to BLUE

Iowa...red to BLUE

Florida....red to Blue


Case closed!!!....color it any way you want to to make it easier on the psyche, but this nation has spoken loudly. What should not be underestimated is this relatively young mans ability to move the masses with his words AND his deeds. He ran as close to a perfect campaign as one could, and he has flipped the electoral map in this country!!


Um .. wait a minute .. Obama won my state, Indiana, by only .97% of the popular vote. This was after outspending McCain 20-1. Obama won here because of Bush and the economy, not because everyone agrees with his policies. We just re-elected our Republican Governor in a landslide, and kicked out our Democrat mayor. To say Obama has flipped the state to blue is, um, not quite accurate.
 
From Nate silver at fivethirtyeight.com

Zogby Engages in Apparent Push Polling for Right-Wing Website

<snip>



NOOOOOOOOO! Not Zogby!

:faint:

I'm about as shocked as when my birthday shows up on the same date year after year. :rolleyes1
 
Um .. wait a minute .. Obama won my state, Indiana, by only .97% of the popular vote. This was after outspending McCain 20-1. Obama won here because of Bush and the economy, not because everyone agrees with his policies. We just re-elected our Republican Governor in a landslide, and kicked out our Democrat mayor. To say Obama has flipped the state to blue is, um, not quite accurate.


ahh what did bush win your state by in 2004, and what was the spending then....I would bet it was about the same in the opposite direction....Indiana was considered an automatic just a few months ago.

And lets not forget that Bush actually lost the popular vote in 2004 (and the election), but we where still told how "red" america was
 
What's to discuss? Obama won because he got more votes, both the popular vote and the electoral. Then again, you must be implying that the United States are comprised of uneducated automatons incapable of making any intelligent decisions. You wouldn't be saying that now would you?

As often as they can...
 
this is the same fool who had Mccain ahead by one two days before the election!!

I said that same thing a few pages ago.

Of course...there were posters on these very boards who hung their hats on that poll and guaranteed a McCain win.

Just sayin'...:rolleyes1
 
And lets not forget that Bush actually lost the popular vote in 2004 (and the election), but we where still told how "red" america was

No he didn't. He lost it in 2000. He won it in 2004 by 3,000,000 votes.
 
ahh what did bush win your state by in 2004, and what was the spending then....I would bet it was about the same in the opposite direction....Indiana was considered an automatic just a few months ago.

And lets not forget that Bush actually lost the popular vote in 2004 (and the election), but we where still told how "red" america was

Our country is still split 50-50. After spending three quarters of a billion dollars on his campaign, Obama could only garner 52% of the popular vote. Bush and the economy created the perfect storm. To think that the entire country could all of a sudden become liberal (Or conservative) would be naive.
 
Some may consider this propoganda, but it's SCARY! We have some uneducated people out there!
 
Some may consider this propoganda, but it's SCARY! We have some uneducated people out there!


Why...for the past 8 years we elected a guy we wanted to have a beer with....we did not like gore because he was too smart for his own good, Bush lost 6 debates and his poll numbers went up after each, because the other guy came off to smart allecky

I think we finally elected the more competent guy....not the guy you want to have a beer with, but the smartest guy!!!!!
 
Why...for the past 8 years we elected a guy we wanted to have a beer with....we did not like gore because he was too smart for his own good, Bush lost 6 debates and his poll numbers went up after each, because the other guy came off to smart allecky

I think we finally elected the more competent guy....not the guy you want to have a beer with, but the smartest guy!!!!!


I agree with you. We elected the smartest guy.
 
Here is the link to the article from Nate Silve http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling.htmlThe fact that this work was a push poll really casts doubt on it
To my mind, this survey meets the definition of a "push poll", which the Random House Dictionary defines as "a seemingly unbiased telephone survey that is actually conducted by supporters of a particular candidate and disseminates negative information about an opponent." That (i) several of the items on the survey contain information which, in addition to being negative, is arguably also untrue; (ii) Ziegler brags that the survey includes a trick question to which no correct answer can be provided, and that (iii) apparently only Obama voters were targeted by the survey (although this is not 100 percent clear), also inform my opinion that the survey can fairly be described as a "push poll".

In an item on his personal website dated today, 11/18, Ziegler claims that Zogby will officially release the results of the survey tomorrow. Ziegler also appeared on Fox's Hannity & Colmes news program yesterday (11/17) to promote his documentary, on which clips from the YouTube video were shown.

Why Zogby International has decided to accept this client and conduct a survey in this fashion is not clear. I would hope, however, that any and all clients that need legitimate polling work conducted would take their business elsewhere. These clients include C-SPAN and Reuters, two organizations with longstanding and well-deserved reputations for accuracy and neutrality; contact information for C-SPAN and Reuters can be found at their respective webpages.
 


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom