Different boards are going to have different leanings. Such as the right wing website I visit often and comment at regularly. If you went by what they say, McCain is a shoo-in and Obama is about to go out in a blaze of non-glory. (never mind that the site didn’t support McCain while Huckabee still looked viable…we don’t mention that!)
I don’t see what the big deal is. This MB isn’t reflective of the US population, for a number of reasons-- one being that many posters aren’t Americans. But oddly, the flurry of threads about McCain and Palin over the last few days is not all that different from what you see in the headlines. Yeah, I kinda roll my eyes sometimes at these thread titles, but many of them are “reality based”, since they reflect certain facts or are legitimate questions.
The place where you see non-reality based thinking is when some posters project their own views on the American public as a whole. I remember one poster predicting a few weeks ago that Obama would an enormous bounce in the polls after the convention. Or, you see predictions made here fairly often that Obama is going to win in a landslide. That’s not supported by the facts.
I was merely parroting the words of a McCain campaign operative. Sam Stone correctly noted that such expectatons management is a natural part of the campaign process, on both sides. Still, I’m sure there were some poor schmoes whose faith in Obama was deeply shaken by the failure of the bounce to be as big as it ‘should’ have been.
Yup, I certainly remember that. Both sides used it but it was certainly used more by the anti-Bush crowd than the small number of surviving Bush supporters at the time. Of course, that may have been because there WERE such a small number of Bush/Republican supporters left by then.
Well…I can see both sides of this. Certainly I think the response to Palin, especially from some of the more, um, outspoken 'dopers, has been a bit over the top. I’ve noticed even some of the Mods seem to be getting a touch frustrated by the constant content free yammering on this subject. The other side of the coin though is that this IS news. Palin is an unexpected and controversial VP choice for McCain, and I think her selection has thrown people for a bit of a loop. Since this is mostly a political forum I’d say that the excitement/antipathy/whatever about Palin is warranted and from my perspective no wholly unexpected. Regardless of who the Republicans picked we were going to get threads on it…the fact that they picked who they picked means even more threads, from the nutball variety to the thought provoking type.
Hell, if nothing else think about the buzz her selection has launched…you can’t throw a dead cat without hitting a story on her. I saw a little blurb on the History Channel last night and my guess is that someone on the all Bass Fishing Channel probably through in a comment after discussing lures or whatever…
Well, as others pointed out, that’s just one poll. By the same token, even the outside mark of Obama being up by 9 points isn’t all that big a gap…even if we factor in the error (which wasn’t quoted). If Obama is up by, say, 5 points in the polls and the error factor is plus or minus 3 then it’s pretty much too close to call. Right now, I think it IS too close to call…and that’s the reality that I think has sparked a lot of the current heat we are seeing from the Obama faithful…I don’t think they can wrap their heads around how close this thing is.
And to be fair to them, I can’t wrap MY head around it either. From my perspective I would have thought Obama would have a comfortable (and consistent) 10+ point lead by now going into the home stretch in Sept/Oct.
Exactly. And I think this is why we are seeing what we are seeing here. Also, I have to say that the SD isn’t exactly representative of the views of Main Stream America. The conservatives here aren’t like most conservatives in either the Republican party or from Joe Citizens perspective. The moderates aren’t really like mainstream moderate types either. The board consensus doesn’t reflect, even roughly, the voting trends of the majority of American’s, nor does the thoughts here express the thoughts of Joe Citizen. We saw that in the 2004 election and I think we are still seeing it in the run up to this election. While I still think Obama is going to win, I think it’s going to be a LOT closer than folks in these parts seem to think it will be.
No, I think it’s the perspective of 'dopers that is out of step with mainstream America…myself included. I think I’m closer to what most American’s think on most subjects, but I know that I’m out of step on a lot of the psudo-Religious issues that I think are more important to more American’s than is generally conceded in these parts.
I remember the 2004 election and how things were spun to try and make Kerry look like he was blowing Bush out of the water. It took a lot of mutual delusion IMHO to think that the race was anything but neck and neck. And I remember the disbelief from some posters when Bush ended up winning…and the knee jerk ‘ANOTHER ELECTION STOLEN!’ type responses after the fact as people disparately trying to reconcile their belief systems with reality. I think if this election is close or if McCain manages to pull off an upset and win we are going to see the same (or even more) level of denial and attempts to reconcile SD ‘reality’ with actual reality.
-XT
Nonsense - this is a complete misunderstanding of polling data and the margin of error. Here’s a handy table and an explanation of how to understand the margin of error.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_08/004536.php
A five point lead with a margin of error of three would mean that you would have a 96% certainty that Obama was ahead of McCain.
Check it out.
Plase see my post above and Marley23 post regarding the origin of this phrase. It is important to remember that it derived from the sheer hubris of a Bush administration aide, who used it derisively to suggest that we were all just swimming in their wake.
Well, I tried to answer this earlier but my post was eaten by the board. I’m guessing they are still having teething problems…
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian
]
Nonsense - this is a complete misunderstanding of polling data and the margin of error. Here’s a handy table and an explanation of how to understand the margin of error.
[/QUOTE]
That’s not the point I was making. I’m well aware of the fact that if Obama has a 5 point lead in the polls, plus or minus 3 points that this gives him a range of 2-8 points. My point was that especially at the lower end this gives him a very thin margin, especially when you factor in the questions asked…as well as the day of the week, the set of the moon and it’s alignment to Mars or Jupiter.
From your article:
This was kind of what I was getting at…sorry I was unclear, been having trouble even getting ON the board to post lately.
As for your other point, while I was aware at the time of the history of the term I had forgotten it. I think the point is moot as I don’t believe it was used in general either tongue in cheek or with a healthy does of irony, as I think most people were using it (from one side or the other) simply to point out that their opponents were out of touch with reality. YMMV however.
-XT
I honestly don’t think any of the examples posted are signs of the community being ‘blind to reality’. The only thread that struck me as fitting that characterization is the one asking whether the Republicans were obviously giving up on this election - a strange comment to make about an election which is as close as it is.
That was John McCain’s camp suggesting a 15 point bounce for Obama.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/mccain-expects-obama-to-get-15-percent-bump-in-polls-2008-08-22.html
That was John McCain’s camp suggesting a 15 point bounce for Obama.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/mccain-expects-obama-to-get-15-percent-bump-in-polls-2008-08-22.html
Still a few timeouts.
Just a few.
And boy, Obama is sure in trouble that he didn’t get those 15 points. What a loser. He’s totally fucked.
-Joe
Well, think of me as an illiterate dock lawyer, if that makes you feel better.
The fact that you say this indicates that you still do not understand what the margin of error means or how to interpret it.
If you are slightly technically inclined, this article might help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error#Comparing_percentages
I’ll certainly acknowledge that if I was ever aware of the real origin of the term “reality-based,” I’d long since forgotten it, and so perhaps that’s not the right characterization for this situation.
No, I don’t expect every thread to say, “The race is close, but…”
I do expect every thread in GD to acknowledge, at some point, that there are some issues about which reasonable people may disagree. It’s that implicit acknowledgement by Senator Obama, in his overall campaign message, that’s made me consider voting for a Democratic presidential candidate the first time in my life.
But here, there’s none of that.
A fair-minded rhetor will acknowledge that his opponent’s side has merit, when it does. Four years ago, I knew I was against Kerry, but I never savaged the man, either here or in person. The hatred and vitriol directed at McCain and Palin is extraordinary, and it’s something that Obama himself has asked not be done.
These are not debates – they are rants thinly disguised as debates.
And this thread has every potential of going off in that direction as well. So to clarify: what weight do you, the fervent McCain/Palin hater, give to the fact that many of your voting countrymen seem to disagree with you? Let’s say Obama’s got a 10 point lead – fine. That still means that millions of voting Americans seem to like McCain and Palin over Obama and Biden. Is there, in your framing of debate issues, no room at all for acknowledgement that they may be reasonable people with reasonable concerns?
Way ahead of you.
-Joe
This is a fair and more general question. What makes a reasonable concern is slippery. The millions of people who support Palin/McCain surely think they have reasonable concerns. I am sure at least some of them are people of good will who simply believe that the Republican ticket is the better way towards the maximization of human well-being. This is fundamentally reasonable. Myself and those voters merely disagree on the means of achieving them, and these are basically empirical questions that I am very fond of discussing.
There are also people who support McCain/Palin because their basic political preferences are fundamentally different from mine. They might have reached tightly reasoned conclusions, but because their preferences are diametrically opposed to mine, politics is no longer a question of means. They, understandably, want to create a world that mirrors their values. Since these values are not my own and are in fact hostile to everything I believe in, I have every right not to call these people reasonable. And they have the right to level the same charge at me.
In the end, I just have to hope that they are less numerous and less motivated than those who share my most basic political axioms. Even if my hopes are borne out, it won’t be by much.
This is a pretty funny thread coming from Bricker, the guy who ferverently defends a bunch of guys whose mantra has been, “You’re in the minority, STFU”.
-Joe
If you’ve followed the Gallop polls you’ll see that Obama’s lead has steadily grown since the DNC. As of 9/2/08 Obama enjoyed a 50% to 42% rating. Perhaps we should look at the electoral vote (guesstimates) and they even, although less dramatically, favor Obama.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election2008.aspx
I would expect the POTUS debates and the VPOTUS debate will cause some strong shifting in these polls. However, the real poll will occur November 4th. and that’s the only one that counts.