saintfan

Are making my brain hurt. CNN is calling it a tie, which means, well, not much really. Here's something for some Sunday Afternoon time killing for anyone with nothing better to do...

2012 Presidential Polls - 2012 Election - POLITICO.com

Danno

They're meaningless if they don't go into details about their sampling.

Many polls are using the 2008 turnout to skew the polls toward Obama, as Dick Morris has pointed out.

Dick Morris also predicted last week that Romney will get over 300 electoral votes. A pretty bold prediction from a man who's reputation (and book sales) depends on his forecasts.

I smell a lanslide victory for Romney.

Let me rephrase that... I smell a landslide defeat for Obama's marxist policies.

arsaint

Redskins game has correctly picked the President since 1932 (I think that is the correct date).

GO PANTHERS!


Of course, LSU-Alabama has picked it since 1984, and that said Obama since LSU lost.

SmashMouth

Only two polls are reasonably credible ... Rasmussen and Gallop. It appears Gallop has ceased updating theirs as the last data shows a date of October 28. Rasmussen shows a tie in the key states with undecideds at around 3% which typically break for the challenger. Most other polls have a faulty sample which we will see exposed on Election Day. Also not mentioned are a number of under he radar data such as the 24 million evangelical voters who do not respond to pollsters, the coal voters particularly in those swing states, right track wrong track, and last but not least the participation percentages and voter enthusiasm which are nowhere near what they were for the left as they were in 2008 as evidenced in 2010. One of the tell tale signs is that Pa is even in play at all, yet another coal and now oil and gas state. It is utterly unpatriotic, disingenuous, fraudulent, and disgusting the amount of disinformation spewed out from the obviously left leaning media outlets. There will be another change besides this president and congress come November 6th; not that it has not happened somewhat already, but there will be much more fall out in the biased media as their credibility is now fully exposed for us all to see and chose with our viewing habits.

SloMotion

So, if the Redskins lose the Sunday before a vote, the incumbent loses the Presidential Election? Wow, talk about karma ... Washington had a couple scores called back on penalties in the fourth qtr also before finally punching it in, but they could have won that game if it weren't for the penalties ... and maybe that goal line stand by Carolina ... and maybe if their defense could have kept Cam from marching 'em down the field 90+ yds ... yada, yada, yada, .

arsaint

'Redskins Rule' to be tested

Obama is a Bears fan, but he has a reason to pull for the Washington Redskins when the Carolina Panthers visit FedEX Field on Nov. 4 – that is, unless his immediate predecessor has reversed a decades-old trend.

Since 1936, if the Redskins won their final home game before the election, the incumbent went on to win the election. The 'Redskins Rule' worked flawlessly until 2004, when the home team lost – but George W. Bush won a second term over Democrat challenger John Kerry. Things began to get sketchy in 2000, when sitting Vice President Al Gore cheered for his home state Tennessee Titans, who beat Washington. A few days later, he lost, too - to Bush. But he won the popular vote. And Gore wasn't an incumbent president but...

Obama or Romney? Ask the squirrel, or the Washington Redskins - WTVM.com-Columbus, GA News Weather & Sports

Visit my History of the New Orleans Saints site at: http://arsaint.50webs.com/Saints/Saints.htm

SmashMouth

Washington Redskins loss Sunday predicts Romney victory
Washington Redskins' loss Sunday predicts a Romney victory
Redskins fans might have been disappointed their team lost 21-13 to the Carolina Panthers, but Mitt Romney likely was not.
If the "Redskins Rule" holds up Tuesday, the Republican presidential nominee will become the country's 45th president.
The rule says a Redskins win in the team's final home game before Election Day keeps the incumbent party in power and a loss means the other party claims the White House.
Since 1940, the rule has predicted the winner 17 out of 18 times.
The only time the rule failed was in 2004 when the Redskins lost to the Green Bay Packers.
That year, Republican President George W. Bush won re-election over challenger and Democratic Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry


Read more: Washington Redskins loss Sunday predicts Romney victory - Fox News

SloMotion

Redskins Rule? I wonder how I missed that one, <scratching head> ... wonder if all this is going to have a negative affect on RGIII's chances for 'Rookie of the Year', ... find out Tuesday I guess.

Beastmode

Obama received 98% of the black votes last election. That won't happen this time and he also lost droves of white votes. It's going to be close. Very close is what the more accurate forecasts are claiming. Those polls also factor in 25% of cell phone data. Really upset PA didn't stick by their voter ID law. That could have been the Obama Killer. Not sure what is going to prevent someone from voting more than once with no ID.

TheOak

RGIII and BSI can go play together some where.

Obama captured the middle and female vote last time. He appealed to those that wanted change for the sake of change. Those too ignorant to see that what he was bringing was a dark change.

Seriously.. who wouldn't want change from Bush's liberal spending and liberal immigration policy's...

Where he fails is that he has nothing new to put on the table, and with the exception of bailing out union workers and ending a war in Iraq prematurely he has not accomplished a thing. .... His plan is more of the same that hasn't worked.