3 Mathematical Models Predict the Next President

[smockers83]

And thank you smockers for talking about the insurance thing - i just didn't have the will to respond to that.

No problem. I wouldn't have had the will either until someone tries to prove me wrong, but I saw that and it tied in with my argument, and alas I came up with the will. I will debate til the end when I know I'm right and the other guy is trying to prove me wrong because that's one of the few things that grinds my gears and makes me go off because people talk out of their asses when they do that. If you don't know what you're talking about, even if you think you do and there is that small amount of doubt in you that you may not know what you're talking about, shut up and listen. You may learn something.

Rant not directed at anyone in particular, just a rant in general because it applies to everyone, including people outside of this forum. Last time I checked, venting was allowed. I've had to deal with a lot of these situations outside of politics this past summer and it annoys the crap out of me.

[rn79870]

Whoops.CNN, the poll of polls, puts it at 49% Obama, 44% McCain.Politico put the Electoral vote at 273 Obama (270 needed to win)Looks more and more like these models are 100% accurate, just like they have been over the last 2 decades. And this site, showing 84 electoral vote tallies, shows all but 8 for Obama. (that's 76 Obama, 8 McCain) http://3bluedudes.com/ProjectDatabase.htm

Come to the light folks, we offer logic and change!

[smockers83]

No, not whoops. Go back to school and learn something. May I suggest a class or two on statistics?

[rn79870]

I'll do that if when you get a real job in the real world.

[spngr311]

I'll do that if when you get a real job in the real world.

Don't bother going back to school to learn about math or science.

[smockers83]

I'll do that if when you get a real job in the real world.

Too quick on the trigger you are. May I send you a business card and some information? I think it would be mutually beneficial.Whoops...
Modified by smockers83 at 1:55 AM 9/24/2008

[marlin29311]

Whoops.CNN, the poll of polls, puts it at 49% Obama, 44% McCain.Politico put the Electoral vote at 273 Obama (270 needed to win)Looks more and more like these models are 100% accurate, just like they have been over the last 2 decades. And this site, showing 84 electoral vote tallies, shows all but 8 for Obama. (that's 76 Obama, 8 McCain) http://3bluedudes.com/ProjectDatabase.htm

Come to the light folks, we offer logic and change!

Once again, i say that its a MODEL. CNN - liberal. Don't fight me, everyone knows it. Fox news is to the right, CNN to the left. Just like NY Times is left, WSJ is right...etc.

Quite honestly, I feel that none of these models is accounting for the fact that Obama is black (yea, i said it - grow the hell up). Quite frankly, there are a lot of people that "say" they will vote for Obama, but when it comes to election day, that little "im not voting for a black man" thing is going to come up. People want to sound PC when they're being surveyed for your "mathematical models" and "polls" but guess what - PEOPLE ARE RACIST. No one talks about this on the news or includes it in any of the polls. Do you think the people down south that still fly the confederate flag on their trucks are going to vote for a black man? I don't...

THE PRESIDENT WILL BE DECIDED ON ELECTION DAY.

[rn79870]

Too quick on the trigger you are. May I send you a business card and some information? I think it would be mutually beneficial.Whoops...

Modified by smockers83 at 1:55 AM 9/24/2008

Oh, you're a CEO at Lehman Bros begging the government to save your @$$ from all your brilliant understanding of economics? Yep, ask me and the other taxpayers to save your @$$. Like I said, get a job.

[rn79870]

Don't bother going back to school to learn about math or science.

Yeah, then I'll be a smart unemployed person.

[AZhitman]

Interestingly enough, and all politics aside, seems the brightest economic minds in America feel there's no choice.

But, we'll sit back and watch you thrash about like a panfish on a treble hook and point fingers... Kinda like your boy Obama.

Hey Smocky - Don't ever let it slip that you have a drinking problem - Bob's the only liberal in America who'll hold it against you.

[marlin29311]

Please follow the rules....

2) Debate your position. If you are incapable of debating or someone has proven you wrong, do not resort to name calling nor other childish behavior

4) Personal attacks means you lose.....and may result in a ban

[rn79870]

Quite honestly, I feel that none of these models is accounting for the fact that Obama is black (yea, i said it - grow the hell up)...

Psssttt. He's been 1/2 black his whole life, and I wouldn't be surprised if most of the American public is aware of that. Most of whom aren't clueless morons who look at a persons race when judging that person.

Quite frankly, there are a lot of people that "say" they will vote for Obama, but when it comes to election day, that little "im not voting for a black man" thing is going to come up. People want to sound PC when they're being surveyed for your "mathematical models" and "polls" but guess what - PEOPLE ARE RACIST.

That is going on the dumbest things ever posted here list. You're putting a handful of jerks in with sane people. I really can't respond to idiotic statements like that, so have a good life.

[rn79870]

Please follow the rules....

2) Debate your position. If you are incapable of debating or someone has proven you wrong, do not resort to name calling nor other childish behavior

4) Personal attacks means you lose.....and may result in a ban

I've insulted the stupid retarded things you've said. Like your race rant, but not you. Feel free to read between the lines though.

[marlin29311]

Yea, I might be including the people with an IQ of 90 in with the rest of the nation, but unfortunately, they're still Americans. And they still vote. Criticize away, but don't deny the fact that it exists. Hell, I've made a fool proof model on it. 100% accurate.

A racist person will not vote for someone of an opposing race.

Damn I'm smart. Don't get in a hissy fit because you don't like to here my racist comment and you automatically write it off as "retarted." I'm not ranting, I'm playing facts. Here, let me cite the coveted "wikipedia" as so many ignorant people do all day (just for clarification, you can't cite wikipedia, it's not a real publication and anyone can edit it, just ask any college professor what kind of grade you'll get when you cite it on a paper)...

"Racist attitudes, or prejudice, are still held by moderate portions of the U.S population. Members of every American ethnic group have perceived racism in their dealings with other groups." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...tates

And as a popular song in the play Avenue Q goes -

"Everyone's a little bit racist." (yea, this probably has nothing to do with anything, but I'm enjoying the fact that you cannot adequately respond to anything I've said so far in this topic)

Don't flame my comment unless you have some hard data that says that race is not a factor in the upcoming election. It is. People harbor predjudices because of our PC culture. Honestly, who's going to say on national TV that people might not vote for Obama because he's black? Duh, we have bigger things to worry about, you know, like Palin's emails and other issues that don't matter.

Supporting idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect
Modified by marlin29311 at 12:17 PM 9/24/2008

[smockers83]

Bob, please refer to the quoted Rule #2. More specifically the proven wrong part and childish behavior part, not necessarily the name-calling part. Thanks.

Thank God I'm not at Lehman's or any of those Wall St firms. I was looking at going into investment banking a couple of years ago because that's where all the jobs were at and people were like "Byahh" about it. If you want to know more about what I do Bob, instead of resorting to childish behavior, as an adult, why don't you just ask me or something instead of leaning on old information and being immature about it?

Not to be egotistical or anything, but each younger generation will be smarter than the generations that came before it. The generation below me will be smarter at my age than I am now. Also, its kind of sad that a 50 year old man is resorting to this level of play, and as a moderator, especially of this forum, you are, or should be at least, held to a higher standard. That is all.

Greg, how did you know I have a drinking problem? Who have you been talking to? Cheers b**** I'll admit, I drink (not a lot anymore like in college) and Bob can say whatever he wants and never let me live it down, I just think Bob won't want to admit he drinks wine coolers.P.S. Just to be clear, that is a joke.

[rn79870]

Not to be egotistical or anything, but each younger generation will be smarter than the generations that came before it. The generation below me will be smarter at my age than I am now.

And you pull yet another fact from your butt.

You're half right though, the generation below you can't help but be smarter than you are at your age.

[smockers83]

And you pull yet another fact from your butt.

You're half right though, the generation below you can't help but be smarter than you are at your age.

Well, fact is fact whether it came from my butt or not, so you can just wipe your face with it. If you can prove me wrong, go right ahead and I'll stand corrected, but I have statistics on this as well through my own empirical research and just the simple fact that a college degree is what a high school diploma used to be 50+ years ago. Again, take the high road here Bob and don't rely on childish behavior, insults, and name calling.

[rn79870]

Prove you wrong? It is up to the speaker to document his data as correct, something you have never done with your posts.

If the only thing you have to back up your point(s) is your own empirical research I'd suggest you skip posting, because that cite is worthless as an authority. Your credibility is being question here, not your ability to invent facts and tell stories.

[rn79870]

A racist person will not vote for someone of an opposing race.

It's also someone who spouts moronic rhetoric about racial issues.

Damn I'm smart. Don't get in a hissy fit because you don't like to here my racist comment and you automatically write it off as "retarted." I'm not ranting, I'm playing facts.

First of all, it's hear, not here, and it's retarded, not retarted.

And yes, ALL racist comments are viewed as retarded. Those comments are the sign of small, pointless, diseased minds. If you haven't heard, this is 2008. Not 1935.

Here, let me cite the coveted "wikipedia" as so many ignorant people do all day (just for clarification, you can't cite wikipedia, it's not a real publication and anyone can edit it, just ask any college professor what kind of grade you'll get when you cite it on a paper)...

"Racist attitudes, or prejudice, are still held by moderate portions of the U.S population. Members of every American ethnic group have perceived racism in their dealings with other groups." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...tates

Why don't you grow up and drop the racist line of attack. It makes you look foolish and bigoted.

And as a popular song in the play Avenue Q goes -

"Everyone's a little bit racist." (yea, this probably has nothing to do with anything, but I'm enjoying the fact that you cannot adequately respond to anything I've said so far in this topic)

How do I respond to idiotic rhetoric about racism without telling the person that it makes him look dumb as dirt?

Don't flame my comment unless you have some hard data that says that race is not a factor in the upcoming election. It is. People harbor predjudices because of our PC culture. Honestly, who's going to say on national TV that people might not vote for Obama because he's black? Duh, we have bigger things to worry about, you know, like Palin's emails and other issues that don't matter.

Supporting idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_effect

There is only one "d" in prejudice.

Just when I thought your previous post reached your low point, you surprise me with a new low.

[SmithSR]

[rn79870]

[rn79870]

Another shallow post from you. That's what, 5 now...

[SmithSR]

[S13_love]

It's also someone who spouts moronic rhetoric about racial issues.

First of all, it's hear, not here, and it's retarded, not retarted.

And yes, ALL racist comments are viewed as retarded. Those comments are the sign of small, pointless, diseased minds. If you haven't heard, this is 2008. Not 1935.

Why don't you grow up and drop the racist line of attack. It makes you look foolish and bigoted.

How do I respond to idiotic rhetoric about racism without telling the person that it makes him look dumb as dirt?

There is only one "d" in prejudice.

Just when I thought your previous post reached your low point, you surprise me with a new low.

First Jesda, now Marlin?

How many more people are you gonna flame in this thread?

You, as a moderator, are setting one hell of an example of what not to do right now.

[smockers83]

Do you know what empirical research even means? The definition of empirical is as follows:

1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data> 2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory> 3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment <empirical laws>

All I had to do was pull up 5 decades of census data and throw it into a graph and interpret it. Are you going to argue with my source? Are you going to argue with the professor that approved of my research and said it was good? Now, I don't come into these forums to write a f'in paper where I have to cite every f'in thing. These forums are a form of conversation. When you're talking to someone, do you cite everything you say? When you hear experts talking, do you hear them citing different people in the field? No, don't think so. If my credibility was on the line, you would have had the ability to disprove me, which you have never done yourself, which is the third definition of empirical.

Here's the data from the Census Bureau in simple graphs:

What these graphs show is the percentage of the population born in a given year and their highest education attainment. For example, those who are foreign-born in 1920, 25% of them finished high school and had no further schooling. Those born in 1940 and born in the US, 10% of them received a Bachelor's and no higher.

If you want to argue with that, take it up with the government because that's where I got the data from. I just put it in a format to easily interpret it visually. If you really want me to, I can extend the birth year out to 1980ish, but you should be able to see the trend and that should suffice.

[audtatious]

Eric, what's the point in having a discussion with him at this point?

[smockers83]

Eric, what's the point in having a discussion with him at this point?

Because...

You, as a moderator, are setting one hell of an example of what not to do right now.

And other similar posts.

If he wants to challenge me, he can challenge me, I'll answer it. I said earlier that if I know I'm right I'll debate til the end. Probably because I'm stubborn and hard headed. If he can prove me wrong, that's fine, I'll stand corrected, big deal. If he wants to question my credibility, I'll come back and prove my credibility and show how foolish he is. Plus, its just fun seeing an old man act this way. I could never see my dad or anyone his age acting in such a way.

[audtatious]

I understand.....Just have to see what happens....

[smockers83]

Yeah, I'll be expecting an attack or more childish behavior sometime tomorrow. Night all.

*edit* Forgot my bibliography for those graphs.Smock, Eric. Income Disparities Between Native-Born and Foreign-Born Persons in the United States of America. 12/18/2007. Pg 11.

[Stev0n]

hey guys

i made three mathematical models that say all democrats eat babies and smoke black tar heroin.

I've only run it with those factors once, but that's the answer so it's 100% correct.

The strangest thing is, i'm a democrat and i partake in neither the eating of babies, nor the smoking of the black tar heroin...hmmm i guess i do it in my sleep?

I guess that makes about as much sense as calling someone a retarded racist. (maybe RN is pushing the racist card to hide the fact that he was actually alive in 1935 - as he put it - i guess if he can free his slaves and change his opinion of people, anyone can?)

On a side note of racism: is it racist that when i found out they opened a popeyes chicken on campus this week, i decided to go. afte 40 mins of no luck i drove around campus til i found a food court with a large gathering of african americans and figured popeyes MUST be in that food court...AND I WAS RIGHT. was that racist since it turned out to be true? Just like it's true that racists DO exist in our society and they WILL vote for the candidate of their race.

Oh and before you decide to be childish or name call and break the rules that you are supposed to enforce, RN. I have a black daughter, i'm not racist.