• Hey Guest!
    British Car Forum has been supporting enthusiasts for over 25 years by providing a great place to share our love for British cars. You can support our efforts by upgrading your membership for less than the dues of most car clubs. There are some perks with a member upgrade!

    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Upgraded members don't see this banner, nor will you see the Google ads that appear on the site.)
Tips
Tips

Election question

G

Guest

Guest
Guest
Offline
How can they call elections before all the precincts are in?
Last night they were calling, (not predicting) the winner with only 15% of the precincts reporting. Later, at 19% reporting, the other candidate was ahead, but they still declared (not predicted) the other candidate the winner. Anyone else notice that?


2008 seemed a little funny. That was called way early too.

Now I remeber in either 2000 or '04, they got it wrong and supposedly backed off on calling their predictions as facts, but I don't see how you can difinatively say candidate "X" won with only 15% of the vote in.
 
naahhh... crystal balls. :smirk:
 
If "they" refers to the news media, the answer is easy: they can do whatever they wish, and usually do! :lol: :yesnod: :cryin:
 
vagt6 said:
If "they" refers to the news media, the answer is easy: they can do whatever they wish, and usually do! :lol: :yesnod: :cryin:

While on Shrooms :yesnod:
 
They compare the current vote patterns to patterns in previous elections. For example, if a "R" is carrying precincts that traditionally vote "D", then they can predict that "R" will also carry "R" precincts and win.
 
John Turney said:
They compare the current vote patterns to patterns in previous elections. For example, if a "R" is carrying precincts that traditionally vote "D", then they can predict that "R" will also carry "R" precincts and win.

And vice versa
 
Yeah but this was a really weird cycle. I'm suprised "D" held what they did as a complete upset was expected by all. ( I'm not getting political, just saying this was one you really couldn't predict from past patters). I just don't see how one can be called so soon when by all accounts, the other candidate was "favored" to win.


Mark, I hear what you're sayin' and I'm completly with you, but I don't see how a fact can be declared before it happens.

Don, I hear ya, all that should mean is the other 85% gets in quicker.

It aint over till the checker flag drops. Don't tell me who won on lap 15 when you still have 85 laps left to go. If that's the case, tell me before I take the car off of the trailer.


I think Doc and Basil might be on to something. :crazyeyes:
 
If anybody is low on them past mentioned, the yard should be about ready
 
DNK said:
If anybody is low on them past mentioned, the yard should be about ready

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

OMG, that is so funny!

Poppin' up 'round here right now. Just had a few showers.
 
Got cows, Don? :jester:
 
Premature election predictions have been known to create embarrassments later.
HarryTruman.jpg
 
Great, Jay!!
 
uhhh ohhh!!!

:eeek: (get's nervious about soon to arrive package.)
 
John Turney said:
They compare the current vote patterns to patterns in previous elections. For example, if a "R" is carrying precincts that traditionally vote "D", then they can predict that "R" will also carry "R" precincts and win.

And that is assuming the people vote the party, not the person.
 
We were wondering the same thing last night. Actually around here they predicted the winner about two weeks ago. The polls closed at 7:30 and with 0% reporting, they called the race at 7:39. It felt like watching the Superbowl and having them declare the winner in the opening play of the game. Sort of took all the fun our of the whole night. I assume since the results were in this am and they were right, they must have some access we don't have, but it sure would help me feel better if they would at least let some of the results role in before they declared a winner.
 
Back
Top