Statistikhengst
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #41
Oh look at that. A foul-mouthed low life arrogant piece of shit has his ass handed to him. Again.So a matchup of one vs. a party is really one vs one. You make much sense. If you're stoned.If you ran a poll of Rick Perry vs. the Democrats you'd find Perry doing pretty well. You never compare one specific person against a group. That's stupid. Only an idiot like Statistheilhitler would fall for it/
In any case, I am sure all the polls in 2006 showed Hillary was a shoo-in. Actually I recall looking back at this and yes they did. Whether the match up was Hillary v. McCain or Hillary v. Giuliani, who was the front runner.
Well, aren't you a stupid fucker. Each one of those matchups is a one-on-one matchup. Just because a pollster is pitting one candidate on one side against a number of candidates from the other side doesn't mean that the matchups themselves are not individual. Now, rub your two remaining brain cells together and let's see if you can figure that one out, fake Rabbi.
And btw, I have indicated more than once that one individual poll is of not much worth, but the aggregate of many polls does indeed tell us something.
Hey, when Hillary Clinton sweeps on election night 2016 with 57% and well over 400 EV, let's talk again.
Ahhh, yet another Rightie who, when his logic (if he had any at all) fails him, goes for personal attacks instead.
Polls at this stage in 2006 universally showed Hillary as candidate beating either Romney or Giuliani. How did those work out?
Stupid fake-ass fucker you are.
Well, let's take a look at that again, you stupid retarded fuck.
You keep saying it's a matchup between one vs. a party, but dumbfuck, each one of those matchups has two very specific names, one being Hillary Clinton, the other being one of the names of presumed GOP candidates. Put down what you are smoking and learn something for a change, you stupid retarded fuck. Of the 534 (yes, 534) matchups I have recorded, exactly ONE is a generic match up. The other 533 are specific name to name matchups.
And, you stupid fuck, you keep going back to 2006, but you don't have courage to go back to 2010-2011, where Obama was consistently leading Romney by +3 to +4 in Ohio in all that early polling and by +4 nationally, and on election night, you stupid retarded fake Rabbi fuck, Obama won Ohio by +3 and nationally by +4.
So, yeah, stupid retarded fuck, early polling is often quite predictive.
No wonder the GOP keeps losing, with retarded fucks like you speaking for it. You by far one of the most vile pieces of excrement to every creep around USMB and until, I have been halfway nice to you. Not any more, you shitstain.
So, I've addressed the OP and the extra details about polling, and you have attacked people instead, you stupid moronic waste-of-breathable-air fuck.
Poll: GOP candidates top Obama in hypothetical 2012 race - CNN.com
Yeah President Mike Huckabee sure cleaned Obama's clock in 2012.
Oh, look, stupid fuck, you pull one single poll. LOL.
I studied ALL of them:
Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.
All 1,958 of them:
Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.
And if you click on a state, you can see how far back the polling goes, like, for instance, OHIO:
Google Sheets - create and edit spreadsheets online, for free.
And those 1,958 are for 2012 only.
Here are the others:
2011 National polling: Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: National Presidential Polling through 11/16/2011
2011 state polling:
AZ through NV:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Statewide polling data through 11/16/2011 - AZ through NV
NH through WY:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Statewide polling data through 11/16/2011 - NH through WI
And, an analysis of all of that data:
Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: Two electoral Landscape Maps as of November 17, 2011
That's 263 more polls, added to the 1,958, making for 2,222 polls, not even including polls before November 2010.
Take a look at Ohio in the 2011 polling:
rosenthalswelt.blogspot.de/2011/11/statewide-polling-data-through-11162011_17.html
12 polls from 12/2010 to 12/2011, 44 match-ups, Obama won 43 of 44 and there was one absolute tie.
Average margin over Romney, through ALL of 2011: Obama +3 to Obama +4.
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +3
Pennyslvania, 2011:
13 polls, 46 match-ups, 43 Obama wins, 1 Romney win, 2 absolute ties.
Average Obama margin over Romney in 2011: +5
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +5.37
Virginia, 2011:
10 polls, 35 matchups, 32 Obama wins, 3 Romney wins.
Obama vs. Romney average for all of 2011: Obama +2.22
Actual result on election night, 2012: Obama +3.87
You look at early polling and see a sea of bolded blue in the states that were the battlegrounds.
The aggregate of polling from even in 2010 was clearly pointing to an Obama win in 2012 - EARLY POLLING, the polling you like to poo-poo.
So, while you pull out one single poll, I show you 2,222 polls, you stupid fuckwad.
Thank you for playing.
Last edited: