Obama's Margin of Error in the Polls

we already know that a small percentage of hilary voters voted for her because of race. But it was only like 27%. The real question is how many independants won't vote for Obama because of his race. I do believe that there is a considerable minority that won't, but if Obama loses race will not be the reason with EVERYONE that voted against him. My bet is, nationwide, less than 20% will vote against Obama based on race. But lets say it is some really high minority of votes like 40% which is crazy, but lets say it is, that still means that 60% of the people that voted against him voted party line, voted fiscal policy, voted social policy. But to say that THE REASON Obama loses was first and foremost his race is absurd.
 
Onceler said:
That's one of the myths that going; his poll #'s have "declined." The race is closer, but his #'s have never shifted from the mid to high 40's, and much has been made since the beginning about his inability to crack 50.

People didn't suddenly turn racist; they've been that way, in droves in America. We're a little over 1 generation removed from Rosa Parks & Friday night lynchings. These are prevasive, longstanding attitudes, hatreds & prejudices, and they won't go away overnight.

If you don't think they're a huge part of this election, you don't know what's going on out there.
Click to expand...


Everyone note that he is inching away from his previous assertion that the ONLY reason Obama would lose is race.

I agree with everything you've said here. But there is a massive difference between asserting that race will be a factor and asserting that it will the SOLE factor.
 
"But to say that THE REASON Obama loses was first and foremost his race is absurd."

If Obama loses by 1-2%, and all other things are equal (no way of knowing that, but if they were), would it be a stretch to say that without racism, he would have won the election?
 
Onceler said:
"But to say that THE REASON Obama loses was first and foremost his race is absurd."

If Obama loses by 1-2%, and all other things are equal (no way of knowing that, but if they were), would it be a stretch to say that without racism, he would have won the election?
Click to expand...

I think if exit polls show that a majority of McCain voters were voting against Obama because of his race, then your statement would be unassailable. But that will not happen and we both know it.

It's something we cannot know until we see exit polling data. Even then, I don't think in the situation you described it would be fair to say that "race" lost Obama the election anymore than say... supporting tax increases did. If changing his position on that issue would have gained him that 1-2%, I don't think it's fair to say he lost because of race unless a substantial portion of McCain's total support came from voters concerned with Obama's race.
 
Last edited:
I think that if Exit polls showed that those that voted for McCain because of Obama's race, would have otherwise voted for a democrat, THEN you would have a point. But I don't know that exit polls are ever that precise.
 
Epicurus said:
My point is that many people including myself and respected political scientists have made a point to temper Democratic optimism to realistic levels. This sort of starry-eyed thinking is the same reason that a moron like Bush beat Kerry.

If you say that polling has proved your point, then show me. As it stands, polls I've seen indicate that only a small minority of voters in both parties would vote against Obama based on his race.

I don't care if you consider what I say "important", but you could at least acknowledge when it is correct.

Summary of Our Conversations for the Last 6 Months:

Feb.
Darla: Wohooo! Democrats will win for sure!
Epic: Be careful. There is still a war going on and it will be closer than you think.

May
Darla: Hillary and Obama supporters rift isn't going to matter come November!
Epic: Even if it doesn't, decreased awareness of American casualties in Iraq will.

August
Darla: HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? OBAMA IS GOING TO LOSE? The only conceivable reason is because of race!!!
Epic: Yeah could be that, or it could be the other 10 million factors we've discussed over the last few months.
Darla: LOLZ! I don't care what you said!
Click to expand...

Actually, from the very beginning, I did not want either Hillary or Obama to be the nominee, and I have said that France showed us the way. When even those very liberal voters, would put a right of center candidate in office, rather than the first woman, what does that tell you Americans would do?

I wanted a white male, and I said so many times. So, stop lying ok?
 
Superfreak said:
Race has only been an issue when OBAMA has brought it up. They are not demonizing Obama on race issues. But I know, I must be wrong, because you and gumby can see subliminal racism in everything and then pretend the rest of the world is crazy for not seeing it. While at the same time ignoring the fact that Obama has brought race into the election in a vain attempt to paint McCain as a racist.
Click to expand...

The only time I know of recently, when Obama's numbers went down in a noticable amount, was when he came back from Iraq and McCain went after him with the "Obama hates the wounded soldiers" ads and attacks. Now you have Lieberman saying that "one candidate is pro-american". And yeah, those are working because Obama is the classic "other".

You mean, McCain isn't running ads saying "DONT TRUST THE NI**ER"? Well blow me down.

Stop being an willfully naive asshole ok?
 
Socrtease said:
we already know that a small percentage of hilary voters voted for her because of race. But it was only like 27%. The real question is how many independants won't vote for Obama because of his race. I do believe that there is a considerable minority that won't, but if Obama loses race will not be the reason with EVERYONE that voted against him. My bet is, nationwide, less than 20% will vote against Obama based on race. But lets say it is some really high minority of votes like 40% which is crazy, but lets say it is, that still means that 60% of the people that voted against him voted party line, voted fiscal policy, voted social policy. But to say that THE REASON Obama loses was first and foremost his race is absurd.
Click to expand...

That's 27% of Democratic primary voters Soc, and that number is filled with bad tidings. You have got to be kidding me.

If anywhere near 20% of independents and democrats vote against obama because of his race, THAT IS the election. Think about your own numbers dude.
 
Darla said:
Actually, from the very beginning, I did not want either Hillary or Obama to be the nominee, and I have said that France showed us the way. When even those very liberal voters, would put a right of center candidate in office, rather than the first woman, what does that tell you Americans would do?

I wanted a white male, and I said so many times. So, stop lying ok?
Click to expand...

Ignoring the fact that you are apparently responding to some attack I did not make, I think it's quite humorous that you thought it would be a good time to remind everyone how you supported Edwards for his "electability."

As far as I can see it, the only argument you have advanced in this thread is telling everyone to stop being naive. You claimed that there was polling to support your assertion but were unable to present it.
 
Darla said:
The only time I know of recently, when Obama's numbers went down in a noticable amount, was when he came back from Iraq and McCain went after him with the "Obama hates the wounded soldiers" ads and attacks. Now you have Lieberman saying that "one candidate is pro-american". And yeah, those are working because Obama is the classic "other".

You mean, McCain isn't running ads saying "DONT TRUST THE NI**ER"? Well blow me down.

Stop being an willfully naive asshole ok?
Click to expand...
And that Darla is a very astute observation. I have never even though of it being him as the OTHER in that sense. That is a very good subliminal observation.
 
Socrtease said:
I think that if Exit polls showed that those that voted for McCain because of Obama's race, would have otherwise voted for a democrat, THEN you would have a point. But I don't know that exit polls are ever that precise.
Click to expand...

I think that that they are that precise, but more importantly, if you have exist polls showing that registered dems and independents voted for the liberal democratic congressperson, and went for McCain you have your answer. That's what makes Sf's "pro-choice" argument such bullshit.

Of course, if you want to wait for the "DON'T TRUST THE NI**ER" comments and ads, and admissions, for "proof", then no, you will never prove this

And that's what many are hoping for. Just like, some still say, it's never been "proved" that bush lied.

The rest of us will wait for all of the evidence, and make our educated conclusions.
 
Epicurus said:
Ignoring the fact that you are apparently responding to some attack I did not make, I think it's quite humorous that you thought it would be a good time to remind everyone how you supported Edwards for his "electability."

As far as I can see it, the only argument you have advanced in this thread is telling everyone to stop being naive. You claimed that there was polling to support your assertion but were unable to present it.
Click to expand...

I was talking about the Democratic exit polling, the rest of the polls won't matter or tell us anything until after the actual election.

Yeah, Edwards turned out to be a bad call on my part, but...a white man would still be more electable. I know it, you know it. There is some perverse streak in you that makes you want to lie about it, but do us all a favor and don't go putting your little dick on the "younduns owned" board, down, and claiming you "owned me," because asshole, with all your screeching about what I haven't proved, the only thing YOU proved was that you think your dick is proof of something.
 
Darla said:
I was talking about the Democratic exit polling, the rest of the polls won't matter or tell us anything until after the actual election.

Yeah, Edwards turned out to be a bad call on my part, but...a white man would still be more electable. I know it, you know it. There is some perverse streak in you that makes you want to lie about it, but do us all a favor and don't go putting your little dick on the "younduns owned" board, down, and claiming you "owned me," because asshole, with all your screeching about what I haven't proved, the only thing YOU proved was that you think your dick is proof of something.
Click to expand...


Getting emotional doesn't win arguments, Darla, as our last few threads have clearly shown.

We'll wait for the exit polls and see who was correct.

And of course a white man would be more electable. I'm not denying that racism exists.
 
Epicurus said:
Getting emotional doesn't win arguments, Darla, as our last few threads have clearly shown.
Click to expand...

Put down something other than your two inch dick Epic.

You come on here spouting shit from your ass, dismiss other people's points as "bullshit opinions" and act like you have something, other than your dick, which you seem to believe owning gives your words some sort of worth over mine.

Let's see it, bigmouth. What have you got other than mocking other people?
 
Darla said:
Put down something other than your two inch dick Epic.

You come on here spouting shit from your ass, dismiss other people's points as "bullshit opinions" and act like you have something, other than your dick, which you seem to believe owning gives your words some sort of worth over mine.

Let's see it, bigmouth. What have you got other than mocking other people?
Click to expand...

*Reposted*

Getting emotional doesn't win arguments, Darla, as our last few threads have clearly shown.

I'm in a good mood and trying to be nice. Don't spoil it.
 
Epicurus said:
Getting emotional doesn't win arguments, Darla, as our last few threads have clearly shown.

We'll wait for the exit polls and see who was correct.

And of course a white man would be more electable. I'm not denying that racism exists.
Click to expand...

Oh so you have no fucking evidence? Not even exit polls from a primary race?

So you did think you were going to "own' this debate by putting down your dick.

Well, put it back in your pants, and wait until you have something to say next time, squeaky.
 
Jesus Christ woman that's enough.

Are you on your fucking period? Go cry in the closet and come back when you can debate like an adult.
 
Epicurus said:
*Reposted*

Getting emotional doesn't win arguments, Darla, as our last few threads have clearly shown.

I'm in a good mood and trying to be nice. Don't spoil it.
Click to expand...

Maybe you ought to worry about my mood before you come in here spouting your cocky-ass bullshit in my face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top