Talk:2012 United States Senate election in Ohio

File:Flag of Dayton, Ohio.gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Flag of Dayton, Ohio.gif, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Seal of Ohio.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Seal of Ohio.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

American Public Polling

Should those polls even be included in this page? Is this even a real polling firm? Their page looks like it was quickly thrown together and their polls are so far from reality that it appears to be either made up numbers or truly awful polling methods. You can't be taken seriously when you show Josh Mandel with 17% support and then have him win 63% of the vote a week later. Can we remove these polls for good? I will be bold and remove them. If that is reverted, the change can be discussed here. Rxguy (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

If you read ALL the polls many were spot on, like the Marcy Kaptur one. Regarding polls you must accept that ALL of them are fallible, and merely a cross section. You reference the Mandel poll number, please be aware of the date, it polled over a week prior to the election, and put 50% at undecided,Josh Mandel himself didnt even announce his candidacy until the Friday prior to the election, some 4 days, so it is not far fetched to think half the people polled didnt have a choice. A poll is a poll regardless of what independent organization administers it. They must be reputable they have results reprinted in major publications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.124.156 (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The fact that 92% of the undecideds would suddenly all break in one direction just seem preposterous. It's true that Mandel waited to make an official announcement, but that really would not affect the results in a significant way as he has been seen as the front runner. There is no sane, logical way to get from those poll numbers to the actual results a week later. There has to be something incredibly wrong with the polling. How do we know that they are even reputable enough to be used here? Rxguy (talk) 21:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Its no different than any poll, Quinnipac, PPP etc, they survey a handful of voters, typically a few hundred, and they publish results, by no means are they set in stone. We must accept the poll as factual, as it is represented as such, and likewise many of their results were spot on, including the US Senate figures for candidate Gregory. Further there are no other surveys of this primary race to the contrary that dispute the findings. Certainly following the announcement of candidacy, Mandel's money went to work with emails, robo-calls, and tv ads that would significantly boost his numbers in a very short time. The survey puts Glisman at 23%, she finished with 12%, Pryce with 6% he finished with 14%, Gregory with 3% he finished with 5%, and Dodt with 1% and he finished with 5%... So with exception of Mandel, they were all reasonable, and the fact is the 50% undecided went to Mandel... Finally, we must accept that there were 300,000 more votes for President than US Senate..Who would those voters have cast for, had they completed their ballots? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.124.156 (talk) 01:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Josh Mandel Portrait.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Josh Mandel Portrait.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Josh Mandel Portrait.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:04, 14 April 2012 (UTC)