Is Palin failin' ? or OMG McCain wins with Palin !! pt. 3 - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-18-2008, 05:56 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 04:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.
Kerry trailed in the daily tracking polls pretty much from the Rep convention to the election.

The reason people thought he was going to win was the exit polling on election day. Clearly it was wrong.
__________________

U2DMfan is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 05:58 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,725
Local Time: 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.
I would have been more concerned if a campaign volunteer and avid supporters of Kerry didn't believe in him winning while campaigning for him.
__________________

Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 07:11 PM   #23
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,900
Local Time: 07:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.
I love when blanket statements are used, such as saying "people thought Kerry was going to win" all in the name of trying to win a point. Who exactly are these people? Well, as you yourself have stated, these "people" were "hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win."

As Vincent said, of course they thought he was going to win, they were his supporters! But as was already pointed out numerous times, the polls at the time all showed that Kerry was slightly behind.
__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 07:19 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.
I think all that proves is that all the people your friend knows/knew thought Kerry would win. Chances are slim your friend actually knows most of the people in the United States.
indra is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 07:21 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:04 AM
don't worry, those diebold machines should work properly.

diamond is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:04 PM   #26
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,455
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by indra View Post
I think all that proves is that all the people your friend knows/knew thought Kerry would win. Chances are slim your friend actually knows most of the people in the United States.
Duh. It's called the law of averages. Besides, I was following the election very closely as well and even though I had a gut feeling that Bush was going to take it I never saw anything on any network that week that called it for either of them. All the reports I saw on numerous networks and newspapers said it was "too close to call".
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:14 PM   #27
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.
People who work for the Democrats have a different mindset than your average American.

Your average American thought it would be close and that both had a shot, but that Bush was the favorite.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:17 PM   #28
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
Duh. It's called the law of averages. Besides, I was following the election very closely as well and even though I had a gut feeling that Bush was going to take it I never saw anything on any network that week that called it for either of them. All the reports I saw on numerous networks and newspapers said it was "too close to call".
You talked to a guy who was at an election party entirely composed of pro-Kerry people. People that are that strongly in favor of a candidate that they would go to a party on election night could very easily be a bit disillusioned because of their fervent support. Like a sports fan that has total faith in a mediocre team. Not all of them, mind you, but enough that it's certainly not accurate.

I don't know if you've ever worked in stats (or common sense), but that's not an accurate representation of America, by your law of averages standards.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:18 PM   #29
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Duh.
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:44 PM   #30
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,455
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfan26 View Post
You talked to a guy who was at an election party entirely composed of pro-Kerry people. People that are that strongly in favor of a candidate that they would go to a party on election night could very easily be a bit disillusioned because of their fervent support. Like a sports fan that has total faith in a mediocre team. Not all of them, mind you, but enough that it's certainly not accurate.

I don't know if you've ever worked in stats (or common sense), but that's not an accurate representation of America, by your law of averages standards.
I knew you'd jump all over the "law of averages" statement without ever even attempting to explain why dozens of newspapers and news networks were saying all week "too close to call".

Anyways, I digress. Isn't this thread supposed to be about Lois Lane...uh, I mean Wonderwoman...uh.... Tina Fey.
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 08:55 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
Duh. It's called the law of averages. Besides, I was following the election very closely as well and even though I had a gut feeling that Bush was going to take it I never saw anything on any network that week that called it for either of them. All the reports I saw on numerous networks and newspapers said it was "too close to call".
Well there you go. "Too close to call" isn't the same as "everyone thinks Kerry will win." Doesn't really matter now anyway. That election is over and we will find out who wins this one after election day.
indra is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 09:49 PM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by indra View Post
we will find out who wins this one after election day.
or after a supreme court decision.
Se7en is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 09:55 PM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Se7en View Post
or after a supreme court decision.
Which will come after election day.
indra is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 09:55 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by indra View Post
Which will come after election day.
Se7en is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 10:05 PM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
I knew you'd jump all over the "law of averages" statement without ever even attempting to explain why dozens of newspapers and news networks were saying all week "too close to call".

Anyways, I digress. Isn't this thread supposed to be about Lois Lane...uh, I mean Wonderwoman...uh.... Tina Fey.
I said people thought it would be close but that in general Bush was the favorite. You said "everyone thought Kerry would win in '04." Whose statement is more accurate when you bring the "too close to call" argument in (which is a turn-around on your original position anyway)?
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 10:08 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Se7en View Post
indra is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 11:05 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,725
Local Time: 12:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
It's called the law of averages.
The law of averages holds true in a representative sample. A whole bunch of supporters for one party is not representative.
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 09-19-2008, 06:40 AM   #38
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 05:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
All the reports I saw on numerous networks and newspapers said it was "too close to call".
Foot in mouth much? You really make it too easy, especially when both those comments are on the same page.

Are you really eager to use your favorite phrase "you're wrong" that you just make up shit?
BVS is offline  
Old 09-19-2008, 08:42 AM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Bumping up against the limits of female bonding

By Ellen Goodman | September 19, 2008

What finally sent her over the top was the poster. There was Sarah Palin as Rosie the Riveter, flexing her biceps under the motto: "We Can Do It!" The image was the same on the T-shirt my friend had left over from the primaries - but with a crucial difference.

"They've Photoshopped Sarah over Hillary. And women are falling for this!" she bellowed into my voicemail.

This certified member of the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pantsuits is not the only one who has moved into a state of disbelief. If 17 percent of Clinton supporters have moved with enormous fanfare to McCain-Palin, how many more have turned their disappointment into high dudgeon?

There is the divinity school professor Wendy Doniger, who blogged that Palin's "greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman," a biological fact best left to a medical school professor. There is the admirable playwright Eve Ensler, who put aside her distaste for "raging at women" to call the choice of Palin "insidious and cynical" and "antithetical to feminism." There are the readers in my inbox who echoed this sentiment: "Frankly I think the Republicans have found themselves a good ol' boy and she happens to wear a skirt."

Three weeks after the nomination of the Candidate from Nowhere, there is still a flood tide of women choking on the possibility that Hillary Clinton paved the way for Sarah Palin. At the same time, there are snarky charges of "hypocrisy" and sneers at "sisterhood" from the right.

Ah, yes, sisterhood. As this mind-boggling, gender-bending campaign races on, women are indeed bumping up against the warm, fuzzy limits of female bonding. Again.

So for both those who dispute Palin's chromosomes and those who cry hypocrisy, a brief pause. It's time to remember the suffragists who worked their whole lives to win the vote for women, believing that their vote could change the country. And then despaired of those women voting just like their conservative husbands. It's time to recall the civil wars of the second-wave feminists and the mommy wars of today. Solidarity is not forever, it's not even for high school.

During this primary, Democratic women were often divided by generation. Many edgy conversations and strained family dinners took place between older women supporting Clinton and younger women supporting Obama. Mothers thought daughters had abandoned the women's movement. Daughters told mothers they'd been liberated to vote for the person, not the gender.

Now, with enough suddenness to cause whiplash, many of these mothers have taken up the cry of their daughters: "I want a woman in the White House, but not this woman." Republicans are fighting for admission credentials to the sisterhood.

The first Republican woman on the national ticket brings something else new to politics, says Kathleen Dolan, a University of Wisconsin political scientist. Since the majority of women are Democrats, as are the majority of female candidates, women aren't routinely asked to choose between their party and gender, their issues and identity. "For the first time in a national election," Dolan says, "women are being asked to cross party lines to vote their gender."

Much of the dismay for those who saw Clinton push the female limits is seeing a conservative benefiting, so far, from the old stereotype of women politicians as change agents and moderates. In a Newsweek poll, 60 percent of the targeted white women voters believe Palin stopped the Bridge to Nowhere or "don't know." Nearly 50 percent think her opposition to abortion is less extreme than it is or "don't know." Less than a third know she supports teaching creationism alongside evolution.

So how to lower the dudgeon? How to save some heat for the man who chose Palin? When you meet "Hunter Chicks 4 Palin," breathe deeply and, OK, read their lipstick: Women are not a monolith. We are divided by age, race, marital status, class . . . and convictions.

After all, Palin may yet be the fulfillment of an old feminist prophecy that Texan Sissy Farenthold once described with her tongue firmly planted in her cheek. We will have achieved equality the day mediocre women take their place beside mediocre men. Check that one off the to-do list.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 09-19-2008, 09:19 AM   #40
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,395
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
No sir, actually most people thought Kerry was going to win. You're wrong...again. A friend of mine who has worked for the Democrats for years was a volunteer for John Kerry in 2004 and even as the election results were coming in on election night he was with hundreds of Kerry supporters and every single one of them thought Kerry was going to win - not by much mind you - but that yes, he was going to win. I'll never forget the tone of his voice over the phone when it was announced that indeed Bush was re-elected. Pure heartbreak.


you're getting confused.

the early polling on election night indicated that Kerry was going to win.

the national polls leading up to the election itself showed Bush with a clear and consistent lead.
__________________

Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×