Who Do You Think Won the Final Presidential Debate?

by The Big Question Posted 2012/10/23 08:00:00

Related Topics: Mitt Romney, Obama, Barack Obama, Presidential, Romney, Mitt, Presidential Debate, Debate

Read More

1,483 votes
Read all 893 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Barack Obama	1,007 votes	68%
	Mitt Romney	476 votes	32%

+32

Add a comment above

maquignon 2012/10/23 08:47:56

Mitt Romney

+37
The winner is NOT the man who yells the loudest, interrupts the most and lies the most. Nor is he the childish one.
>> See Replies

More polls by The Big Question

wildcat 2012/10/25 01:28:11

Barack Obama

+4

reply
wedge56 2012/10/24 18:12:15

Barack Obama

+2
"Syria is Iran's route to the sea!" *facepalm*

reply
Jim 2012/10/24 16:35:27 (edited)

Mitt Romney

+1
Romney from the standpoint that he looked more presidential, he didn't yell, get hot under the collar or get dragged off his talking points. He stuck to what he had to say and didn’t deviate. Obama on the other hand, at times look almost frantic, like a guy who knows that he was under the gun to over achieve. Ultimately a debate covering foreign policy should give a clear advantage to the sitting president but in reality neither candidate came out the clear winner. Both had their highs and lows and neither really did anything to inspire undecided voters either way. This election is basically decided at this point most voters have made their choices. In fact many are over-decided and don't want to hear anymore more from either one.

reply
TkiaCat to Jim 2012/10/24 17:44:38
exhon2009 2012/10/24 16:26:20

Mitt Romney

+2
The post debate polls keep moving towards Romney. Today Ohio is now even at 48/48. Gallup gives Romney a 51 to 46 advantage. Rasmussen now gives Romney a 50 to 46 lead. States like WI, NH and PA, that weren't in play weeks ago, are now in play. Looks like the undecideds are deciding NOT to vote for Obama.

reply
Jim to exhon2009 2012/10/24 16:39:37

+1
I hope you are right but polls are only as accurate as their sampling criteria allows them to be. This one is going right down to the wire and I'm afraid that the only polls that are going to mean anything are the exit polls on Election Day.

reply
exhon2009 to Jim 2012/10/24 17:34:15

+1
All true. Early polls were criticized because they took the record democrat turnout of 2008 and made the sample even more one sided in favor of Obama. I have a hard time believing ANY of the polls use selection criteria to favor Republicans. I want to remain positive and what I'm seeing is trending to a blowout win by Romney.

reply
TkiaCat to exhon2009 2012/10/24 17:50:30
exhon2009 to TkiaCat 2012/10/25 00:49:42

True, the people of Ohio are not ignorant. They will prove it on November 6th by voting for Romney. You, on the other hand, cannot even get the spelling of the diatribe correct. It's Romnesia, not Romneynesia. Sheesh, what a tool you are.

reply
TkiaCat to exhon2009 2012/10/25 01:10:57
exhon2009 to exhon2009 2012/10/25 01:25:21

So TkiaCat has a yellow streak running down his back, takes a shot and blocks me. Pathetic response. You're no Cat, you're a pussy.

reply
Jon Bergen 2012/10/24 07:28:57

Barack Obama

+4
Poll: Decisive win for Obama in final debate

That poll is far more likely to be accurate than anything produced by SodaHead. So I am slightly surprised that (on this occasion, at least) this site's results appear to be trending toward what a scientific poll produced.

Anyway, yeah...

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/10/24 17:35:28

+1
Obama won the second debate yet the polls continued to trend towards Romney immediately AFTER that debate up to the present time. What do you attribute that to?

reply
TkiaCat to exhon2009 2012/10/24 17:56:34
exhon2009 to TkiaCat 2012/10/25 00:52:57

Sure, GOP operatives infiltrated the call lists of The Gallup Poll and the various Polls that make up the Real Clear Politics Average. You should think about the real cause for the shift in polls rather than try to throw up some weak bunk like that. You may need to conjur up more dead voters than previously believed to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

reply
Jon Bergen to TkiaCat 2012/10/25 06:08:25

+1

Neoconservatives have a big problem with reality.

Why? Because...

...and there's not enough room in a single post to show all the reasons why...

reply
John Wa... to exhon2009 2012/10/24 18:04:37

+2
An invasion of conservatives on Sodahead.

reply
exhon2009 to John Wa... 2012/10/25 00:57:41

That doesn't even qualify as an ill-considered response. I'm talking about the REAL polls. You may have heard of them, Gallup, Rasmussen as well as the polls that make up the averages in Real Clear Politics. They have been moving inexorably towards Romney AFTER all three debates. Check them out on the web. You may want to perform your bowel movement beforehand, just looking out for you.

reply
John Wa... to exhon2009 2012/10/25 20:35:04 (edited)

+1
Yea, and I've heard the stories about how they're flawed.. I'm looking at the real numbers, and how the - is calculated, and could give a rats ass about what people say. I look at the numbers themselves.

Example... 57 out of 100 people polled have a bais towards Romney. 57/100.

Does it sound right to you that those 57 are suppose to represent the over 300 million people in America?

Here's an explaination of what margiin of error IS: Wikipedia

I won't bother with the real math because looking at how it's defined, you should be able to grasp at least the gross level

In this case... the margin of error? Try well over 50%... and yet Gallup claimed for 2700 people to represent thover 300 million, is only 2%? Bull.

Someone in the gallup organization failed their statistics class.

reply
exhon2009 to John Wa... 2012/10/25 21:41:32

You're just a statistical wizard JW. FOr starters while there may be 300 million plus people in the United States those under 18 don't vote and Convicted Felons aren't supposed to vote. Never mind that they elected Al Franken. Many tens of millions simply don't vote and are not registered. Another 10 to 20 million are not U.S. Citizens. So out of the box you don't even understand the population of eligible voters.

Rasmussen was easily the most accurate poll in predicting the 2008 actual results. Did you know that in political polls the margin of error can be ADDED to one candidate's totals and SUBTRACTED from the other candidates totals? e.g. if they say a state is tied 48/48 +/-2% then the real statistical difference could be 50 to 46.

Using that as a guide can you explain your 50% margin of error? Romney is up by 50% to 47% in the Gallup daily tracking poll. Applying your understanding of margin of error you just said that the real number could be 0% Romney to 97% Obama or 100% Romney NEGATIVE 3% Obama. I think you're the one that just failed statistics JW.

reply
John Wa... to exhon2009 2012/10/26 16:49:15 (edited)

You do know there are boundries here, as in it is not possible to go below 0% or above 100%. Get real.

The point of the margin of error is to show how accurate the results are to begin with. If there is a very large margin of error... then the survey/statistical data shouldn't be considered authoratitive because there's a very real chance of the conclusion being wrong. It is not an absolute gauge of who is going to win, but HOW ACCURATE THE SURVEY IS.

Even if you cut the number in half, 150 million.. that is still a very grossly inaccurate margin of error. 2%, is bull. Try a lot larger then that, which takes it WELL past declaring either of them as potentially being in the lead.

Potentially. The only time the truth will really be known is on nov 6th.

reply
Jon Bergen to John Wa... 2012/10/25 06:23:36

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/10/25 06:22:35

Gallup was indeed biased and considered an outlier with respect to all the other polls, the great majority of which contradicted the Gallup results.

Here's a detailed article about why the Gallup poll was wrong, also explaining why its dramatic, exaggerated, shocking and erroneous results got more play in the media (hint: because they were shocking, dramatic and exaggerated, and contradicted most other polling data):

Oct. 21: Uncertainty Clouds Polling, but Obama Remains Electoral College Favorite

Meanwhile...

REUTERS POLL: Obama Is Going To Trounce Mitt Romney In A Landslide

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/10/25 16:36:14

Talk about biased, Reuters is a left wing propaganda machine. Gallup isn't a news outlet so they have no agenda to promote. Most polls I've seen have Romney solidly ahead in Florida, Virginia and Colorado. He's pulled even in Iowa and Ohio and is within the margin of error in NH, WI and PA. Obama is beginning to look a lot like Nixon with a budding scandal developing over Benghazi.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/10/25 17:42:00 (edited)

Yes, of course every polling outfit or article producing results contradicting the hoped-for scenario of a Romney lead is 'liberal,' 'biased' and 'completely untrustworthy.'

Time poll: Obama leading Romney in Ohio

In Polls, Romney’s Momentum Seems to Have Stopped

Poll: Obama leads Romney by 5 in Ohio

Actually, Obama Is A Lot Closer To Winning The Election Than You Think

Obama odds-on favorite to win election

Intrade - Barack Obama to be re-elected President in 2012

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/10/25 18:35:21

Real Clear Politics, RCP, is an average of many polls as individual polls can be biased either way trough manipulation or simple error in assumptions made in voting profiles. RCP has Romney up nationally at 48.9% versus 46.7% for Obama. At this same point in 2004 Bush led Kerry by 48.9% to 45.8% and ended up winning by 50.7% to 48.3%.

If you do the math on the 2004 election 1.0% voted for someone else and 4.3% were undecided at poll time. 58% of the undecided vote broke for the CHALLENGER. Applying the exact same methodology to this years RCP poll yields a 50.8% Romney 48.2% Obama outcome. One big difference is that Bush did not have an unfolding scandal going on in the two week run up to the election like Obama does with Benghazi. I'm not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me so let's both just wait for November 6th.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/10/25 19:24:39

Fair enough. In which case I will just leave you a few items to think on; the first explains why you should not put too much faith in RCP:

Oct. 21: Uncertainty Clouds Polling, but Obama Remains Electoral College Favorite

Next, money transcends politics, and companies don't like to go broke betting on the wrong horse:

Presidential election odds: Barack Obama still a big favorite over Mitt Romney

Europe’s Largest Betting Company Calls Election for President Obama

Not only do they dislike betting on the wrong horse ~ they dislike even more paying out on the wrong horse:

Paddy Power pays over €1 million early on Obama victory

Final point: That graph in the previous post (and virtually every other graph or chart out there like it) has consistently awarded Obama a greater chance of victory and a larger share of electoral votes throughout the entire run-up to the Election. Consistently.

This I will concede, however:

Shenanigans involving rigging of Ohio's electronic voting machines managed to convert a 5% lead for Kerry in Ohio to a 2% win for Bush back in 2004. Despite exit-polling data confirming Kerry taking the state. Despite numerous 'irregularities' which were deflected by key GOP power-brokers at the highest levels of Ohio's government.

That happened before, and could happen again....

Fair enough. In which case I will just leave you a few items to think on; the first explains why you should not put too much faith in RCP:

Oct. 21: Uncertainty Clouds Polling, but Obama Remains Electoral College Favorite

Next, money transcends politics, and companies don't like to go broke betting on the wrong horse:

Presidential election odds: Barack Obama still a big favorite over Mitt Romney

Europe’s Largest Betting Company Calls Election for President Obama

Not only do they dislike betting on the wrong horse ~ they dislike even more paying out on the wrong horse:

Paddy Power pays over €1 million early on Obama victory

Final point: That graph in the previous post (and virtually every other graph or chart out there like it) has consistently awarded Obama a greater chance of victory and a larger share of electoral votes throughout the entire run-up to the Election. Consistently.

This I will concede, however:

Shenanigans involving rigging of Ohio's electronic voting machines managed to convert a 5% lead for Kerry in Ohio to a 2% win for Bush back in 2004. Despite exit-polling data confirming Kerry taking the state. Despite numerous 'irregularities' which were deflected by key GOP power-brokers at the highest levels of Ohio's government.

That happened before, and could happen again. Especially when Romneys own the company operating Ohio's voting machines.
(more)

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/10/25 19:33:24

How much do you know about betting? It is illegal to bet on U.S. elections inside the U.S. which is why the only "action" is overseas. Foreigners view U.S. politics mostly through the lens of their own left leaning media which tilts 99% to Barack Obama. As for betting houses, all they want to do is "equalize" the money flow and take 10% off the winner. If Obama is odds on to win that means you have to put more than a dollar to win less than a dollar, e.g. 50 cents, so you get your dollar plus 50 cents back.

I think it's a sucker's bet but if you're confident in it why don't you put some money up and let me know that you've put your money where your mouth is. That would be more impressive to me than some Europeans putting their mouths where their money is.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/10/29 16:22:28

If Romney's family did not own voting machines in Ohio and Colorado, and if Rove were not directly involved in attempts to steal another Election, I would be betting on an Obama win with my disposable dollars. If there were no danger of rigging the outcome, it's my feeling the outcome would be decided already, and has been decided for a long time.

Romney was a terrible horse for the GOP to bet on.

But any race, fight or contest can be rigged with the right people and the right tools. David Rothschild (certainly no Democrat or Obama-booster) did the math weeks ago here at Romney chips away at Obama’s lead, but electoral math still favors president:

'The overall odds for Obama remain well above 60 percent for one simple reason: Romney needs all three swing states to win, while Obama needs only to deny him one of them.... If they are still in toss-up territory [close to Election Day], it will mean Romney will need to flip heads three times in a row, while Obama will need to flip tails only once.'

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/10/29 16:29:04

Better hurry up and put your money down. Only a week remaining.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/02 11:38:14

From Polls: Obama ahead in Iowa, Wis., N.H:

'Romney probably needs to win all three states if he loses Ohio, where he is also seen as trailing the president.... Whoever loses [Ohio] will have to sweep Iowa, Wisconsin and New Hampshire — which total 20 electoral votes — to have a chance.'

From Latest Presidential Polls: Obama Winning in Key Swing States as Romney Steps Up Spending:

'According to RCP if the race were to end today Obama would win with a projected 294 electoral votes to Romney’s 244.... In Iowa, which represents six electoral votes, Obama has an eight-point lead on Romney. In Wisconsin, which represents 10 electoral votes, Obama is ahead by six points amongst likely voters with 51% to Romney’s 45%. NBC’s battleground state maps shows that if Obama wins Iowa and Wisconsin then his path to 270 electoral votes comes down to a 3-2-1 formula. Obama would win by either winning 1) Just Ohio 2) A combination of New Hampshire and Virginia or 3) A combination of Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire. NBC’s battleground state map has Obama leading Romney 243 electoral votes to Romney’s 191 with eight battleground states representing 104 electoral votes....

From Polls: Obama ahead in Iowa, Wis., N.H:

'Romney probably needs to win all three states if he loses Ohio, where he is also seen as trailing the president.... Whoever loses [Ohio] will have to sweep Iowa, Wisconsin and New Hampshire — which total 20 electoral votes — to have a chance.'

From Latest Presidential Polls: Obama Winning in Key Swing States as Romney Steps Up Spending:

'According to RCP if the race were to end today Obama would win with a projected 294 electoral votes to Romney’s 244.... In Iowa, which represents six electoral votes, Obama has an eight-point lead on Romney. In Wisconsin, which represents 10 electoral votes, Obama is ahead by six points amongst likely voters with 51% to Romney’s 45%. NBC’s battleground state maps shows that if Obama wins Iowa and Wisconsin then his path to 270 electoral votes comes down to a 3-2-1 formula. Obama would win by either winning 1) Just Ohio 2) A combination of New Hampshire and Virginia or 3) A combination of Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire. NBC’s battleground state map has Obama leading Romney 243 electoral votes to Romney’s 191 with eight battleground states representing 104 electoral votes....
(more)

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/11/02 16:40:24

How much money did you put down? You should take out a second on your home, fly to Britain and put it all on Obama. There's still time but it's running out. You don't have any doubts about those polls do you?

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/02 17:24:35

It's illegal for US citizens to bet on an election. So I would not state I had bet on the Election on a website for all to read.

But if I DID bet, I would bet $400 ~ just a number I 'picked out of the air.'

Like this guy...

Why Nate Silver's Gambling Streak Makes Me Trust Him More

...I trust a man who has proven himself again and again in his ability to analyze statistical data. He's betting $1,000.

Others feel the same way:

Online Gamblers Bet on Obama Victory

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/11/02 17:59:56

No, it's illegal for betting INSIDE the U.S. Las Vegas cannot take action on it.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/04 20:17:16

Obama odds-on favorite to win election (Las Vegas Review-Journal)

From Presidential election odds: Up to $16 million riding on Barack Obama, Mitt Romney race:

'With just days to go before Tuesday’s election, Barack Obama was a heavy -400 (1/4) favorite on Saturday. William Hill listed Republican candidate Mitt Romney as a +300 (3/1) underdog.'

From 2012 US Presidential Race Betting Odds:

'Barack Obama 1/4
Mitt Romney 3/1'

54% of Americans think Obama will win; 34% predict Romney

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/11/04 20:35:15

When the democrats are done molesting children to get them to support Obama they might want to consider an academic study that has never been wrong:

http://www.colorado.edu/news/...

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/05 23:30:16

'Keys' forecasting model predicts an Obama victory

'Lichtman: I have Obama holding 10 out of 13 keys. Therefore, Obama is a predicted winner. And this model has correctly predicted the popular vote outcome of every election -- retrospectively from 1860 to 1980; prospectively since.'

100% success at determining the winner of every Election since the Civil War.

Again, Obama has this Election wrapped up ~ only way for GOP to take it...is to steal it.

So get ready for another Florida 2000 and/or Ohio 2004. Even so, though, that may not be enough.

From Ross Douthat, Romney booster and the conservative author of “Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream”:

Prediction Time: Obama Survives

You should read your fellow conservative's intelligent and informative breakdown...but only if you have the stomach for it.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/02 17:26:35

Over half a million kids (voting the same as their parents) agree in a survey that has proven remarkably accurate in the past in calling the Election beforehand:

Nick’s Kids Pick the President Results

And now some Republicans are also jumping on board the Obama victory bus.

Mayor Bloomberg Endorses Obama

Colin Powell endorses President Obama

Hey, the world loves a winner ~ what can you do?

reply
exhon2009 to Jon Bergen 2012/11/02 18:01:55

Bloomberg is an independent. Has been for years. Where have you been? Colin Powell is a RINO and his defection means ONE vote will go to Obama, HIS.

The world will probably end if we start relying on Nick Kids to pick the president. What a bunch of bull.

reply
Jon Bergen to exhon2009 2012/11/04 19:58:07

Polling of kids reveals parents' voting patterns, and has been used in the past to reliably forecast Elections.

Race is close; from Obama, Romney remain close two days before election: poll:

'48 percent said they would vote for Democrat Obama, while 47 percent sided with Romney.'

Final national NBC/WSJ poll: Obama 48%, Romney 47%

The Reuters/Ipsos and NBC News/Wall Street Journal polls both agree how close it is:

48% Obama
47% Romney

That's national polling, however; in the Electoral College, Obama continues to lead Romney right up till just days before the Election.

reply