What's the definition of a landslide?

[risky biz]

Obama got 5.36% more popular votes than Romney. That isn't a landslide?

[da pickle]

"risky biz" <risk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Obama got 5.36% more popular votes than Romney. That isn't a landslide?

No, but you are still fertilizer.

[Steam]

On Nov 11 2012 12:07 PM, risky biz wrote:

> Obama got 5.36% more popular votes than Romney. That isn't a landslide?

Wrong, your figure is double the margin he received, it was nothing
resembling any kind of landslide

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Getting more popular votes was not the goal. Winning the "battleground
states" was the goal. Obama won all of them except North Carolina.
That's something of a landslide.

--bks

[Jason Pawloski]

On Nov 11 2012 4:35 PM, Steam wrote:

> I forgot the link
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin

Maybe he's doing a Clave-esque counting of a small subset of votes, and
just not telling anyone, cause "he thought it'd be clear?" (If you
question him on it, he'll call you an idiot)


--
WILLIAM COLEMAN PHOTO GALLERY! See here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGg-mbTtlJ4&feature=youtu.be

William Coleman of Las Vegas Nevada is a dangerous, violent convicted
criminal. He has recently committed felonies in his harassment of an RGP
user.

"As a result of my encounter with the Henderson Police SWAT team, I
eventually pled guilty to Conspiracy to Commit a Crime, a gross
misdemeanor." - William Coleman admits that he is a convicted criminal
(cite: http://recgroups.com/a/1/127894/)

"I have killed many dogs in my life, and I will kill many more." William
P. Coleman boasting about his sociopathic tendencies (cite:
http://recgroups.com/a/1/128390/)

"For years, when I see one or more teenaged girls walking down the
street, I pull up beside them and ask them if they want to go smoke
dope and fuck. Amazingly, this technique gets good results fairly
often. Otherwise, I wouldn't continue to use it." Convicted criminal
William Coleman (cite: http://recgroups.com/a/1/123930/)

WARNING! 67-year old convicted criminal William Coleman describes how he
uses Facebook to meet minor girls. See:
http://recgroups.com/t/1/123914#a123914

[Steam]

On Nov 11 2012 3:27 PM, Steam wrote:

[Steam]

Still not a landslide

[risky biz]

1. Obama received 62,088,847 popular votes. Romney received 58,783,137
popular votes.
ref:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012

2. 62,088,847 minus 58,783,137 equals a difference of 3,305,710 popular
votes.

3. 3,305,710 popular votes divided by 58,783,137 popular votes equals
5.623%.

4. Therefore, is not the statement "Obama got 5.36% more popular votes
than Romney" correct outside the fact that I mistakenly typed from memory
the figure 5.36% when it was actually higher (5.623%)?

If not please explain how you calculate what I said as stated.

[Pepe Papon]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:27:48 -0800, "Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid>
wrote:

No, he is correct, and you are wrong. 62 million is 5% more than 59
million. Do the math.

--

Pepe "The Crapflooder" Papon

[BillB]

On 11/12/2012 12:25 AM, Pepe Papon wrote:

> No, he is correct, and you are wrong. 62 million is 5% more than 59
> million. Do the math.

Steam thought Romney was going to win. He can't do math.

[Travel A]

Badly blithered:

"Getting more popular votes was not the goal. Winning the "battleground
states" was the goal. Obama won all of them except North Carolina.
That's something of a landslide.

I wrote:

To an idiot.

That may be the strategy to winning, but it dosen't define "landslide."
The popular vote does.

The popular vote represents the whole country, not just a few swing
states, of which, the most important ones were squeakers.

A "landslide" is a national consensus that includes all 50 states. Not a
happanstance, 8 state majority, on a per state basis.

Even to use the electoral college as a merasure, to find a "landslide,"
one must go back to Ronald Reagan's elections. Winning 49 states
including California, Massachusetts, etc.

Did Obama win Idaho? How about the south? Missisippi?

Obama got 60,800,692 votes and Romney got 57,906,613 votes. That's a
lousy 2,894,079 vote difference. And you're calling it a landslide?

In 2008, McCain/Palin got 3 milion more votes than Romney/Ryan did in
2012. If Romney chose Sarah Palin for the VP candidate, Romney would
have won.

With Sarah Palin, McCain got a higher number of the Mormon vote than
Romney (who's a Mormon). Mormons are conservatives, and they came-out on
election day for Sarah.

Romney only lost by 2.4%. And you're calling it a landslide?

Obama is the only president who won reelection with less votes than he
won his original election. And you're calling it a landslide?

[Travel A]

Oh, and, "the math." Obama 50%; Romney 48%.

Where's this "5%," exactly?

And Obama got a mere 50%. Where's the "landslide"?

[Steam]

Until the hurricane it was a lot tighter, of course you can't see that
with your blinders on. You even thought John Kerry was going to win in
2004.

[Steam]

Oh I see, real clever. Instead of calculating it the way it has always
been calculated, which is a percentage of all votes cast (122,807,277),
you come up with a very misleading figure based only on a much smaller
number. Using your method, your statement is correct, but you tried to
spin it as some sort of landslide. Try recalculating real landslides with
your new formula and see what a real landslide election looks like. With
your extremely misleading use of numbers, I am sure you should be working
for the Obama administration.

[BillB]

On 11/12/2012 1:30 AM, Steam wrote:

> Until the hurricane it was a lot tighter

You need to stop taking hits off the Fox News bong. Obama was an almost
4:1 favorite on Intrade prior to the first debate, and held fairly
steady at ~2:1 for the rest of the campaign.

> You even thought John Kerry was going to win in
> 2004.

Ya, I never saw that Osama bin Laden video coming. I'm still pissed at
bin Laden for costing me a hundred bucks.

On top of that, in those days I really didn't believe a high enough
percentage of Americans could *possibly* be that stupid, after all the
death and destruction he caused, and what was virtually certain to
follow. I'll never make that mistake again. NEVER underestimate the
stupidity of right-wingers. And look what ended up happening. He very
nearly took down the whole country. Thank God Obama stepped in at just
the right time.

[risky biz]

Sheesh. What a dunderhead.

[risky biz]

IT WAS THE HURRICANE!!! ROMNEY LOST BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE!!!

LMAO. Anyway, assuming your feeble excuse-making had the slightest
validity, hurricanes are referred to as acts of God, aren't they? That
would mean God hates you. That would, in fact, have a degree of
rationality as a basis.

[da pickle]

-------------------------------------------------
posted Monday Nov 5, 2:45 pm
---------------------------------
ot: Top ten excuses from our ‘righties’ on Wednesday
=======================================
Here's my guess. Feel free to add a few more.
LOL............................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
1. Hurricane Sandy fucked Romney at just the right time.
2. Those dirty rotten Democrat’s committed voter fraud again.
3. Chris Christie screwed Mitt over by being courteous to Obama.
4. The dirty rotten lying main stream media saved Obama’s ass.
5. Romney was just not extreme-far-right enough. The GOP should have
run Michele Bachmann.
6. (from Travel A) Romney should have picked Sarah Palin for his VP.
7. Voters are so ignorant, they didn’t realize Obama is black.
8. Voters are so ignorant, they didn’t realize Obama is a Muslim.
9. Donald Trump’s $5 million dollar offer was so stupid a large
number
of independents changed their minds and voted for Obama.
10. How were we supposed to know that Scott Rasmussen and Dick Morris
are so full of shit.
---------------------------------
thread:
https://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.poker/browse_frm/thread/17651c8b43c7c634/3688fb7463c00e4c?lnk=gst&q=top+ten+excuses#3688fb7463c00e4c

[BillB]

On 11/12/2012 9:10 AM, da pickle wrote:

>> Until the hurricane it was a lot tighter, of course you can't see that
>> with your blinders on. You even thought John Kerry was going to win in
>> 2004.


> -------------------------------------------------
> posted Monday Nov 5, 2:45 pm
> ---------------------------------

> ot: Top ten excuses from our �righties� on Wednesday

> =======================================
> Here's my guess. Feel free to add a few more.
> LOL............................
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> 1. Hurricane Sandy fucked Romney at just the right time.

haha...#1 on your list. I've got to hand it to you, you know your
right-wingers.

[Steam]

On Nov 12 2012 9:13 AM, BillB wrote:

> On 11/12/2012 9:10 AM, da pickle wrote:
>
> >> Until the hurricane it was a lot tighter, of course you can't see that
> >> with your blinders on. You even thought John Kerry was going to win in
> >> 2004.
>
>
> > -------------------------------------------------
> > posted Monday Nov 5, 2:45 pm
> > ---------------------------------

> > ot: Top ten excuses from our ‘righties’ on Wednesday

> > =======================================
> > Here's my guess. Feel free to add a few more.
> > LOL............................
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> > 1. Hurricane Sandy fucked Romney at just the right time.
>
>
> haha...#1 on your list. I've got to hand it to you, you know your
> right-wingers.

Ha ha, I saw the post when it was made, it doesn't make it any less true

[Steam]

So which was it, run of the mill left wing dishonesty or run of the mill
left wing stupidity on your part?

[Steam]

I never said he handled it wrong, or that he planned it, it just happened

[Steam]

I was actually pretty surprised that Bush still had that much support, but
it was obvious from the beginning that Kerry was going to get kiboshed, at
least to anyone paying attention

[risky biz]

You're just pretty stupid because you can't do simple math or read a
simple sentence. Does that answer your question?

[BillB]

On 11/12/2012 3:29 PM, Steam wrote:

> I was actually pretty surprised that Bush still had that much support, but
> it was obvious from the beginning that Kerry was going to get kiboshed, at
> least to anyone paying attention

No, it wasn't. What were the prediction markets saying just prior to the
Osama bin Laden video being released a week before the election?

[Steam]

Ok, so we can just put it down to standard left wing dishonesty, with a
little stupidity mixed in for good measure

[risky biz]

Like I said- you can't read.

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <v5d5n9x...@news.ezprovider.com>,

risky biz <risk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Obama got 5.36% more popular votes than Romney. That isn't a landslide?
>

The Republicans are on record as saying that 332 electoral votes
qualify as a landslide.

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=407714795961696
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <lbp5n9x...@news.ezprovider.com>,

Steam <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>
>I forgot the link
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_popular_vote_margin
>

Executive summary: Obama's popular vote margin was 2.7%; less than
average, but not extrordinary. Kennedy won by 0.17%. Nixon by 0.7%.
George W. Bush by -0.51%

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <bfc1a81l0bmmd4lmg...@4ax.com>,

Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:27:48 -0800, "Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>

>No, he is correct, and you are wrong. 62 million is 5% more than 59
>million. Do the math.

Apparently, the percentage is calculated as a percentage of total votes,
not a percentage of the votes the other guy got.

[Edward A. Falk]

In article <5hl7n9x...@news.ezprovider.com>,

risky biz <risk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>IT WAS THE HURRICANE!!! ROMNEY LOST BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE!!!

There was also some holy roller claiming that the hurricane was
an act of God.

Hmmm, so God sent a hurricane through the Republican convention
in August, and then sent *another* hurricane to help Obama win
in November.

I'm starting to get a grasp on God's agenda here.

[Pepe Papon]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:10:44 -0800, "Steam" <cereb...@live.com>
wrote:

>> > Oh I see, real clever. Instead of calculating it the way it has always
>> > been calculated, which is a percentage of all votes cast (122,807,277),
>> > you come up with a very misleading figure based only on a much smaller
>> > number. Using your method, your statement is correct, but you tried to
>> > spin it as some sort of landslide. Try recalculating real landslides with
>> > your new formula and see what a real landslide election looks like. With
>> > your extremely misleading use of numbers, I am sure you should be working
>> > for the Obama administration.
>>
>> Sheesh. What a dunderhead.
>
>So which was it, run of the mill left wing dishonesty or run of the mill
>left wing stupidity on your part?

More like run of the mill arithmetic.

[Pepe Papon]

He probably also thought Romney was going to cut taxes, raise
spending, and balance the budget.

[Pepe Papon]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 06:38:06 +0000 (UTC), Vince <vi...@hush.ai> wrote:

>fa...@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote in news:k7s821$n19$6@blue-
>new.rahul.net:

>
>> In article <5hl7n9x...@news.ezprovider.com>,
>> risky biz <risk...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>IT WAS THE HURRICANE!!! ROMNEY LOST BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE!!!
>>
>> There was also some holy roller claiming that the hurricane was
>> an act of God.
>>
>> Hmmm, so God sent a hurricane through the Republican convention
>> in August, and then sent *another* hurricane to help Obama win
>> in November.
>>
>> I'm starting to get a grasp on God's agenda here.
>>
>

>Looks like God hates us.

God loves all His children. It's just that he wanted Obama to win.

[Pepe Papon]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:31:43 +0000 (UTC), fa...@rahul.net (Edward A.
Falk) wrote:

>In article <bfc1a81l0bmmd4lmg...@4ax.com>,
>Pepe Papon <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:27:48 -0800, "Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>No, he is correct, and you are wrong. 62 million is 5% more than 59
>>million. Do the math.
>
>Apparently, the percentage is calculated as a percentage of total votes,
>not a percentage of the votes the other guy got.

That's how it's calculated if you're talking about the percentage of
the electorate. But that's not what the OP was talking about.

[Clave]

"Pepe Papon" <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:rr14a85rtje9tucc6...@4ax.com...

While simultaneously repealing Obamacare, abolishing Medicaid and the
Department of Education, privatizing Social Security and Medicare, and
appointing Robert Bork and Roy Moore to the Supreme Court.

And on the foreigh fronts, launching a war with Iran and creating peace in
the middle east.

Jim

[Travel A]

The hurricane gave Obama a bump in the ratings of probably 4% to 5%.
When the Bin Laden/Seals story broke, Obama's ratings jumped. When Obama
has given a State of the Union speech his ratings jump in a similar way.

It's well beyond obvious that Romney went from a good 5% lead in the
Gallup polls before the hurricane to, after the hurricane, a 1% lead the
day before the election, because of Obama's hurricane-ratings-jump.
This surge carried through with an election day break toward Obama, not
Romney.

Most importantly, Romney had the "debates momentum," before the
hurricane, but this ended because of the hurricane publicity for Obama.
Assisted by the media, and the polls stopped publishing for a few days
in "respect for the storm situation." Without polls, no
Romney-discussions in the news cycle.

"Romney wins, Barring unforeseen circumstances." Well, those unforeseen
circumstances happened.

The "women's vote" went from a tie before the hurricane, to Obama +11
after the hurricane.
Other demograpghic categories slipped for Romney as well.

Romney never did have good, solid support in the first place. The
conservative base, particularly the "elderly vote" stayed home on
election day.

The race was hanging on Obama's low (three and a half years in the 47%
to 48% range) "job approval" rating as an edge for Romney; subject to
the main issue: the economy improving convincingly and significantly, or
unforeseen circumstances.



.................
And.
Here's a quote from "Wiki Answers."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_did_Obama_win_the_elections_with

Obama beats McCain by 7.2% in the popular vote.

That's with Obama at 52.9% and McCain at 45.7%.

Now (Rounded-off), Obama beat Romney 50% to 48% in the popular vote, and
you goofballs are saying that Obama won by a 5%+ "landslide"? Try 2%,
with Obama barely reaching the 50% level, and being the only president
since the "1800s" to be re-elected by less than his original election.

And you can go back to your baboon forum now, Falk.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Travel A <nin...@webtv.net> wrote:
>The hurricane gave Obama a bump in the ratings of probably 4% to 5%.

"The ratings?" Travel A thinks it was a reality TV show.

Excellent job of doing a final "unskewing" of all the whackjobs:
<http://election.princeton.edu/2012/11/12/the-final-unskewing/>

Bottom line, the state polls, in aggregate (using medians
to throw out disinformation companies like Susquehanna),
were excellent. The national polls were heavily skewed
towards the Republicans (by about 2.5%).

--bks

[Pepe Papon]

He was for all those things before he was against them and then became
for some of them again.

[Travel A]

Badly blithered:

"The ratings?" Travel A thinks it was a reality TV show.

I wrote:
Obama's "job approval" ratings, not TV ratings, you imbecile.

[Travel A]

And.
Here's a quote from "Wiki Answers."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_did_Obama_win_the_elections_with

Obama beats McCain by 7.2% in the popular vote.

That's with Obama at 52.9% and McCain at 45.7%.

Now (Rounded-off), Obama beat Romney 50% to 48% in the popular vote, and
you goofballs are saying that Obama won by a 5%+ "landslide"? Try 2%,
with Obama barely reaching the 50% level, and being the only president
since the "1800s" to be re-elected by less than his original election.

And you can go back to your baboon forum now, Badly.