Slate's New America



  •  [URL=http://imageshack.us][IMG]http://img374.imageshack.us/img374/6898/cowyfn0.gif[/IMG][/URL]

     

    I realize 96% isn't bad for most things, but come on. You even borrowed a standard map for this.



  • I don't get it.
    I see that there is an extra US chunk, but even if that's what you are complaining about, I do not get it.



  •  Damn. I also noticed the "lean rep" total of 32, which includes Texas (34 by itself.) Addition must be hard in election season. :(



  • @henke37 said:

    I don't get it.
    I see that there is an extra US chunk, but even if that's what you are complaining about, I do not get it.

     

    Colorado and Wyoming have mysteriously switched places.



  • What is this a map of?  if it's for presidential candidates Obama vs McCain, then they habe TERRIBLE polls.  NM as solid dem for instance.   If it is for congress or something, then WTF are they talking about the electoral college for?



  • @tster said:

    What is this a map of?  if it's for presidential candidates Obama vs McCain, then they habe TERRIBLE polls.  NM as solid dem for instance.   If it is for congress or something, then WTF are they talking about the electoral college for?
     

     


    http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Graphs/new-mexico.html



  • @Kazan said:

    http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Graphs/new-mexico.html

    Holy crap, most of the results on that site are ridiculous.  I suppose it reaffirms the uselessness of polls.  I sincerely doubt that there was ever a period where McCain and Obama were tied in Massachusetts and there is no way Obama has lost 10% over the last few months in his home state of Illinois.  Illinois would probably be 65% for the Democrat even if he wasn't a popular black candidate from Chicago. 



  •  @illithid said:

    Colorado and Wyoming have mysteriously switched places.

    Seems to have been fixed already. Also, 97% of the world (95% that aren't from the US, and the ~40% of Americans that probably don't know where all the US states are) couldn't find Colorado or Wyoming on a state map unless the state's names are printed on it.  So, no wonder nobody figured out the WTF until it was pointed out.  ;-)



  • @illithid said:

    Damn. I also noticed the "lean rep" total of 32, which includes Texas (34 by itself.) Addition must be hard in election season. :(

    It may appear that there are electoral votes missing, but those are just the black electoral votes -- the Republican Party is getting started early in not counting their votes this year.

     

    (It's just a joke, don't get bent out of shape over it.) 



  • @shepd said:

    Also, 97% of the world (95% that aren't from the US, and the ~40% of Americans that probably don't know where all the US states are) couldn't find Colorado or Wyoming on a state map unless the state's names are printed on it.  So, no wonder nobody figured out the WTF until it was pointed out.  ;-)

    This video is of an Australian comedy team (The Chaser) who came to the US to ask people on the street various "simple" questions. All in all its pretty astounding, but about half way through they ask people to point to various countries on a map of the world (France, Iran, Korea etc). But the map has been doctored so that Australia has actually been labelled with the particular country they are asking about. Of course the people they show in the video clips all point to Australia rather than the country they are being asked about.



  • @shepd said:

    Also, 97% of the world (95% that aren't from the US, and the ~40% of Americans that probably don't know where all the US states are) couldn't find Colorado or Wyoming on a state map unless the state's names are printed on it.  So, no wonder nobody figured out the WTF until it was pointed out.  ;-)

    Meh, those are just the boring states that nobody cares about.  Wyoming and Colorado could switch places in real life and I doubt anybody would notice.  Really, we need to just eliminate about 32 of the lesser states and streamline our map.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @shepd said:

    Also, 97% of the world (95% that aren't from the US, and the ~40% of Americans that probably don't know where all the US states are) couldn't find Colorado or Wyoming on a state map unless the state's names are printed on it.  So, no wonder nobody figured out the WTF until it was pointed out.  ;-)

    Meh, those are just the boring states that nobody cares about.  Wyoming and Colorado could switch places in real life and I doubt anybody would notice.  Really, we need to just eliminate about 32 of the lesser states and streamline our map.

     

    Wyoming has all of our coal...



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    (It's just a joke, don't get bent out of shape over it.) 

     Heh.  The fact that you felt you had to add this says a lot about this forum of late.....



  • @Zagyg said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    (It's just a joke, don't get bent out of shape over it.) 

     Heh.  The fact that you felt you had to add this says a lot about this forum of late.....

     

    Why do you feel the need to complain about the forum in a thread that has basically no trolling or flaming?  If you must complain about it, find a thread that's already been derailed by a flamewar.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Kazan said:

    http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Graphs/new-mexico.html

    Holy crap, most of the results on that site are ridiculous.  I suppose it reaffirms the uselessness of polls.  I sincerely doubt that there was ever a period where McCain and Obama were tied in Massachusetts and there is no way Obama has lost 10% over the last few months in his home state of Illinois.  Illinois would probably be 65% for the Democrat even if he wasn't a popular black candidate from Chicago. 

     

     

    he's gathering and using data from the major pollsters... he never makes any claims as to their accuracy... we know most polls these days suffer from pretty serious selection bias that's going to favor mccain



  • @Kazan said:

    he's gathering and using data from the major pollsters... he never makes any claims as to their accuracy...

    Yes, I know this.  How does it conflict with what I said?

     

    @Kazan said:

    we know most polls these days suffer from pretty serious selection bias that's going to favor mccain

    [citation needed]  Seriously, where do you get this idea from?  If the last 2 presidential elections have taught us anything it's that 1) polls are generally worthless and 2) Democratic candidates seem to poll slightly higher than the outcome of the election.  I believe most polls going into the elections showed Gore and Kerry having a very slight edge and both times that was incorrect.



  • @tster said:

    Wyoming has all of our coal...

    Well, I'm not suggesting we nuke Wyoming, that's reserved for Kentucky and Oklahoma exclusively.  I say we just combine all the lesser states into one large state and name it something like "Kensucky" or "Oregone".  Perhaps combine Idaho and Utah into Udaho.



  • @tster said:

    Why do you feel the need to complain about the forum in a thread that has basically no trolling or flaming?

    It wasn't so much a complaint as an observation.  It struck me as curious that MW decided to add an explanatory suffix to an obvious joke explaining that it was a joke, presumably due to the recent trend of exhibiting emotional hypersensitivity

    However on consideration, given the aforementioned trend, I accept my post could have been inflammatory and I will duly STFU.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @shepd said:

    Also, 97% of the world (95% that aren't from the US, and the ~40% of Americans that probably don't know where all the US states are) couldn't find Colorado or Wyoming on a state map unless the state's names are printed on it.  So, no wonder nobody figured out the WTF until it was pointed out.  ;-)

    Meh, those are just the boring states that nobody cares about.  Wyoming and Colorado could switch places in real life and I doubt anybody would notice.  Really, we need to just eliminate about 32 of the lesser states and streamline our map.

    The people in Colorado and Wyoming might notice. 



  • @Arctic_Panda said:

    The people in Colorado and Wyoming might notice.

    Wyoming is nothing but salty, hard-drinking coal miners.  Colorado, from my understanding, is nothing but wealthy people on ski trips, Jon Benet Ramsey's murderous parents and those adorable South Park rapscallions.  Regardless, we can't stop progress by giving in to frail, hu-man emotions such as this fondness of yours for The Forbidden Territories.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Kazan said:

    we know most polls these days suffer from pretty serious selection bias that's going to favor mccain

    [citation needed]  Seriously, where do you get this idea from?  If the last 2 presidential elections have taught us anything it's that 1) polls are generally worthless and 2) Democratic candidates seem to poll slightly higher than the outcome of the election.  I believe most polls going into the elections showed Gore and Kerry having a very slight edge and both times that was incorrect.

     

    Actually most people think that Obama will be polling higher than he will perform in the election.  He polled higher in the primaries than he performed.  The problem is that people say they will vote for him because they are afraid of looking racist.  But when it gets down to actually voting, they don't have to worry about that.  Also good pollsters have very little selection bias.  look only at Rasmussen and Gallup polls of likely voters (take polls of registered voters with a grain of salt, and totally ignore polls of adults).  Also, during the primaries the Survey USA polls were the most accurate.  I don't know if that will hold for the election, but they have been doing good so far this year.  



  • @tster said:

    Actually most people think that Obama will be polling higher than he will perform in the election.  He polled higher in the primaries than he performed.  The problem is that people say they will vote for him because they are afraid of looking racist.  But when it gets down to actually voting, they don't have to worry about that.  Also good pollsters have very little selection bias.  look only at Rasmussen and Gallup polls of likely voters (take polls of registered voters with a grain of salt, and totally ignore polls of adults).  Also, during the primaries the Survey USA polls were the most accurate.  I don't know if that will hold for the election, but they have been doing good so far this year.

    I'm not sure why you responded to me with this as it is the same basic point I was making.  Good info, though. 



  •  I replied to you to show that I was furthering your argument.



  • @tster said:

    I replied to you to show that I was furthering your argument.

    Ah, okay, cool.  The "actually" at the beginning made me think you were writing a refutation but it didn't seem like it. 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @tster said:

    I replied to you to show that I was furthering your argument.

    Ah, okay, cool.  The "actually" at the beginning made me think you were writing a refutation but it didn't seem like it. 

     

    I have a slight mental retardation.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.