CO-SurveyUSA: Tied race

[Sbane]

SurveyUSA is up to its usual games, I see.

You're right--this poll slanted decidedly to the left.  As I noted visa-vis the ARG poll out of Colorado yesterday, it is likely that Romney has a small but significant lead in Colorado right now. 

The Survey USA crosstabs are 34 D, 34 R, 30 I.  But the actual active voter registration is 32 D, 34 R, 31 I.  Even in 2008, it was R +1.  It won't be any less than R +3 this year, especially considering the gains in voter registration since '08 made by the GOP here.  So no matter how you slice it, Romney leads Colorado.

Some people who are registered voters (even "active" registered voters) don't vote. This should not be a difficult concept.

In a state where Republicans always outnumber Democrats in elections, and where the GOP has actually made real gains in the voter rolls since '08 (when, yet again, more Republicans voted than Democrats), why would 2012 be the most explosive year for Democratic turnout in Colorado ever?  The notion defies logic.

Well argued. I like you. But don't expect too much "logic" around here.

All right, let's use a little logic. Even using the active registration numbers there is only a R+2 advantage. If you use total registration, which is of course the logical thing to do, it evens up more or less. So why would there be a R+3 turnout? You guys do realize who the Republican nominee is, right? There won't be a groundswell for him, that's for sure. And while Democratic enthusiasm was low earlier in the year, things seem to have changed. I'm not saying they are more enthusiastic than Republicans, but the whole enthusiasm divide is a little overplayed. An even partisan turnout is pretty much what is likely to happen, considering that was the case even in 2010.

BTW guys could you please put your money where your mouth is and go on intrade and short sell Obama or buy Romney. I already think Obama is undervalued, but since there are a lot of people like you guys out there, I think prices could go even lower meaning more money for me.

[Sbane]

All right, let's use a little logic. Even using the active registration numbers there is only a R+2 advantage. If you use total registration, which is of course the logical thing to do, it evens up more or less. So why would there be a R+3 turnout? You guys do realize who the Republican nominee is, right? There won't be a groundswell for him, that's for sure. And while Democratic enthusiasm was low earlier in the year, things seem to have changed. I'm not saying they are more enthusiastic than Republicans, but the whole enthusiasm divide is a little overplayed. An even partisan turnout is pretty much what is likely to happen, considering that was the case even in 2010.

BTW guys could you please put your money where your mouth is and go on intrade and short sell Obama or buy Romney. I already think Obama is undervalued, but since there are a lot of people like you guys out there, I think prices could go even lower meaning more money for me.

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VoterRegNumbers/2012/August/VotersByPartyStatus.pdf

Active voter registration.

D: 739,778
R: 837,732
I: 728,794

D: 31.8%
R: 36%
I: 31.2%

Colorado active voters turnout was roughly 72% in the 2008 election. Colorado inactive voter turnout has ranged from 3-7% county by county in the subsequent elections. It's not a direct comparison, but it's what we have.

Why? Most inactives are gone or dead. It's silly to count them as equal with the actives.

Ok. Please go buy Romney on Intrade. Thanks.

[Sbane]

All right, let's use a little logic. Even using the active registration numbers there is only a R+2 advantage. If you use total registration, which is of course the logical thing to do, it evens up more or less. So why would there be a R+3 turnout? You guys do realize who the Republican nominee is, right? There won't be a groundswell for him, that's for sure. And while Democratic enthusiasm was low earlier in the year, things seem to have changed. I'm not saying they are more enthusiastic than Republicans, but the whole enthusiasm divide is a little overplayed. An even partisan turnout is pretty much what is likely to happen, considering that was the case even in 2010.

BTW guys could you please put your money where your mouth is and go on intrade and short sell Obama or buy Romney. I already think Obama is undervalued, but since there are a lot of people like you guys out there, I think prices could go even lower meaning more money for me.

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VoterRegNumbers/2012/August/VotersByPartyStatus.pdf

Active voter registration.

D: 739,778
R: 837,732
I: 728,794

D: 31.8%
R: 36%
I: 31.2%

Colorado active voters turnout was roughly 72% in the 2008 election. Colorado inactive voter turnout has ranged from 3-7% county by county in the subsequent elections. It's not a direct comparison, but it's what we have.

Why? Most inactives are gone or dead. It's silly to count them as equal with the actives.

Ok. Please go buy Romney on Intrade. Thanks.

Sure. In the meantime I would suggest you go to math class.

Well, you are of the opinion that 1/3rd of the Colorado electorate is either dead or has moved away. Not sure what sort of class you can go to in order to remedy that issue.

[Sbane]

All right, let's use a little logic. Even using the active registration numbers there is only a R+2 advantage. If you use total registration, which is of course the logical thing to do, it evens up more or less. So why would there be a R+3 turnout? You guys do realize who the Republican nominee is, right? There won't be a groundswell for him, that's for sure. And while Democratic enthusiasm was low earlier in the year, things seem to have changed. I'm not saying they are more enthusiastic than Republicans, but the whole enthusiasm divide is a little overplayed. An even partisan turnout is pretty much what is likely to happen, considering that was the case even in 2010.

BTW guys could you please put your money where your mouth is and go on intrade and short sell Obama or buy Romney. I already think Obama is undervalued, but since there are a lot of people like you guys out there, I think prices could go even lower meaning more money for me.

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/VoterRegNumbers/2012/August/VotersByPartyStatus.pdf

Active voter registration.

D: 739,778
R: 837,732
I: 728,794

D: 31.8%
R: 36%
I: 31.2%

Colorado active voters turnout was roughly 72% in the 2008 election. Colorado inactive voter turnout has ranged from 3-7% county by county in the subsequent elections. It's not a direct comparison, but it's what we have.

Why? Most inactives are gone or dead. It's silly to count them as equal with the actives.

Ok. Please go buy Romney on Intrade. Thanks.

Sure. In the meantime I would suggest you go to math class.

Well, you are of the opinion that 1/3rd of the Colorado electorate is either dead or has moved away. Not sure what sort of class you can go to in order to remedy that issue.

Nope, you might want to check reading class too.

For some reason, you have confused the statement 'most inactives are gone or dead' to 'all inactives are gone or dead', and calculated a figure based on that confusion.

It's quite amusing to see such from someone who claims to use a little logic.

Ah, the spin begins! How exactly do you define "most"? 50.1%?

[Sbane]

What did you mean when you said most? Or did you just say something without thought? Wouldn't surprise me....

To think that even 16.6% of the electorate has died or moved away is ridiculous! And of course I doubt you were thinking that when you wrote your post.

[Sbane]

What did you mean when you said most? Or did you just say something without thought? Wouldn't surprise me....

To think that even 16.6% of the electorate has died or moved away is ridiculous! And of course I doubt you were thinking that when you wrote your post.

I see now that you have graduated from faulty mathematics to sweeping conclusions of sheer nonsense based on that faulty mathematics.

I think about what I say. I am not like you. You ought to look up the number of Americans that move each year.

What number did you have in mind? It's a simple question.

And yes, people move but an even larger number only vote in presidential elections.