Congratulations to the Democratic Party Supporters on this Forum

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
After all the mistakes made by the exit polls, you would think people would realize how unreliable they are.

[/ QUOTE ]By "all the mistakes" do you mean the discrepancy between reported totals and exit poll results in one country during one election?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_poll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_U....%2C_exit_polls

[MS Sunshine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I love the "mathematical certainty" that the numbers that unreliable pollsters produce must be better than the votes that real people cast on election day.

Exit polling is the most accurate polling. It should be within 0.5%. When this number varies by much in elections around the world the USA looks on those elections as having voter fraud. It is hard to see where it wouldn't show the same here.

MS Sunshine

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure President Kerry agrees with you.

When was the last time they did an exit poll of absentee ballots?

After all the mistakes made by the exit polls, you would think people would realize how unreliable they are.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe they were not all mistakes.

MS Sunshine

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The senate will be hard since uneducated people in Wyoming, Idaho, etc vote against their own interests.

If you believe this is true, then the onus lies on democrats to be better educators and campaigners.

Also, paging Copernicus to this thread. Paging Copernicus to this thread. We need responses to some rebuttals.

[/ QUOTE ]

There have been no rebuttals to my statement, only dismissals of the relevance of the history of 6th year administrations, erroneous claims that winning the House and not the Senate is "huge", and guesses at the outcome of the election that appear to be based on week old polls.

When a supposedly equal or superior team is spotted 21 points in a game, winning by 10 is nothing to gloat about.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. what happened to you as a kid?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Heck, why not cancel election day and just go with the polls?


[/ QUOTE ]

Besides five or six of the nine Supreme Court Justices, how many lawyers do the Republicans have lined up tomorrow to steal the election?

[/ QUOTE ]

1 for every 100 dead people that vote D

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The senate will be hard since uneducated people in Wyoming, Idaho, etc vote against their own interests.

If you believe this is true, then the onus lies on democrats to be better educators and campaigners.

Also, paging Copernicus to this thread. Paging Copernicus to this thread. We need responses to some rebuttals.

[/ QUOTE ]

There have been no rebuttals to my statement, only dismissals of the relevance of the history of 6th year administrations, erroneous claims that winning the House and not the Senate is "huge", and guesses at the outcome of the election that appear to be based on week old polls.

When a supposedly equal or superior team is spotted 21 points in a game, winning by 10 is nothing to gloat about.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. what happened to you as a kid?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was one of the last generations to get a decent public education. What happened to you?

[Dr. Strangelove]

[ QUOTE ]


I was one of the last generations to get a decent brainwashing by jackbooted statist thugs. What happened to you?

[/ QUOTE ]

anarchofyp

[bisonbison]

There have been no rebuttals to my statement, only dismissals of the relevance of the history of 6th year administrations, erroneous claims that winning the House and not the Senate is "huge", and guesses at the outcome of the election that appear to be based on week old polls.

Personal attack deleted, but let me try to put this year's senate races in perspective by offering actual statistics about 6th year midterms (6YM).

Since WW2, there have been 7 presidents elected to a second term of office: Truman, Ike, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush. Truman and Johnson didn't serve full first terms, and Nixon didn't serve a full second, but I'm trying to be thorough here. The midterm elections in their second terms were in 50, 58, 66, 74, 86, 98 and 06.

In 50:
President: Truman, D
Senate before election: 54D, 42R
Contested seats: 23D, 13R (+10D)
Net Gain: +5R
Senate after election: 49D, 47R

In 58:
President: Ike, R
Senate before election: 50D, 48R
Contested seats: 13D, 21R, +2 open in Alaska (+8R)
Net Gain: +15D, 2 from open elections in Alaska
Senate after election: 65D, 35R

In 66:
President: Johnson, D
Senate before election: 67D, 33R
Contested seats: 20D, 15R (+5D)
Net Gain: +3R
Senate after election: 64D, 36R

In 74:
President: Nixon, R
Senate before election: 56D, 42R, 1 Independent, 1 Conservative
Contested seats: 20D, 14R (+6D)
Net Gain: +4D
Senate after election: 60D, 38R, 1I, 1C

In 86:
President: Reagan, R
Senate before election: 47D, 53R
Contested seats: 12D, 22R (+10R)
Net Gain: +8D
Senate after election: 55D, 45R

In 98:
President: Clinton, D
Senate before election: 45D, 55R
Contested seats: 18D, 16R (+2D)
Net Gain: no change
Senate after election: 45D, 55R

Things to note:
1. The prez's party never gained senate seats.
2. In all but 2 years, the president's party had more seats contested.
3. 1986 was the only time since 1918 that senate control switched hands in a 6YM.

So, what should our expectations be for 2006? What would a historically normal result be?

In 06:
President: Bush, R
Senate before election: 45D, 55R
Contested seats: 18D, 15R (+3D)


Well, if we say "what portion of the prez party's contested seats are lost?", we get:

1950: 22%
1958: 62%
1966: 15%
1974: 29%
1986: 36%
1998: 0%

For an average of 27% loss. Given that 15R seats are in play this year, a normal result in this very small sample would be a Dem gain of 4 seats, for a 49D, 51R Senate. A gain of 5D seats, which would still leave the Republicans in control of the Senate, would be a + outcome.

So, there's your rebuttal. You're an idiot.

[fish2plus2]

If the Dems get in power things are going to get alot better baby, and by alot better, I mean exactly the same.

[Dr. Strangelove]

No, c-span is going to be a lot more interesting. Lots of drama.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
Three cheers for the lesser of the two evils!

[/ QUOTE ]

/end obligatory moronic AC comment.