An unusually large amount of polling for a Sunday, as everybody tries to have their say before the convention:
Mason-Dixon, whom we haven't heard much from thus far, is the principal actor today, having released polling in six Western states. And their numbers are a little ... weird. Obama winning by 3 in Colorado, but losing by 4 in New Mexico? McCain with a larger lead in Nevada than in Arizona? Mason-Dixon has a pretty good track record, but these polls have unusually small sample sizes of 400 persons each, which makes this sort of thing more likely. The only state that Mason-Dixon had surveyed before was Nevada, where John McCain had been 2 points ahead in mid-June.
Quinnipiac also has their take on Colorado: John McCain has a 1-point lead. That's down a hair from 2 points last month, but better for him than their June edition, when Obama had led by 5. And Public Policy Polling gives Obama a two-point lead in Virginia, the same margin he's held in their two prior polls of the Commonwealth.
Colorado, Virgina and Ohio remain the three principal focal points of Obama's offense. Our model makes Obama a very slight favorite in Colorado with a 53.0% probability of winning. Obama wins the election 95.9% of the time that he wins Colorado in our simulations.
Obama remains a small underdog in Virginia, winning that state 43.1% of the time. But he wins the electoral vote 99.3% of the time that he does win Virginia.
And Obama is a slightly longer underdog in Ohio, winning there 39.6% of the time. However, it is nearly impossible for him to lose the election when he wins Ohio, as he takes the election 99.8% of the time that Ohio swings his way.
See some of you in Denver.
8.24.2008
Today's Polls, 8/24
@ 8:22 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
111 comments
The Mason Dixon polls make zero sense. How did Obama manage to drop so much in Wyoming? No one is advertising and only Obama has people on the ground. How in the world can he be that far behind in NM and NV? Very odd.
Florida, Montana, Nevada, Virginia, and Ohio all slipping back towards the middle. That's a lot of pink on the map - in just about every region of the country to boot.
Glad to see the Mason-Dixon polls weighted appropriately, too, since their 10 days old and small sample size.
Nate, Mule Rider, wanker, obligatory, etc etc.
You´re right Nate.
The Mason-Dixon numbers are ridiculous.
Obama dropped 2 points overnight in the Gallup daily tracking poll, making it a 45% to 45% tie (though Obama gained 1 point overnight in the Rasmussen tracker). So far, no Biden bounce. Tomorrow's numbers will be interesting to see.
Rasmussen found that among unaffiliated/independent voters, Biden made 25% more likely to vote for the Dem ticket and 33% less likely to do so at this early stage.
I'm oddly in Vegas for work, and saw this poll at my hotel. On the drive here I didn't see a single Obama or McCain sign. Toto, I'm not in Seattle anymore!
The other odd part of this poll is that it's already pretty old. 1.5 weeks. Clearly they were waiting for the Sunday before the convention. I'd say Obama was at his worst at that point during August (post-Spears/vacation) when these polls were taken.
(Side note: it's probably going to be the best we have on Wyoming for a long time! And 400 is a large sample for them!)
Nate,
I don't know if this would be too much work, but have you considered changing the scenario analysis to add a "(candidate) loses (state), wins election" line for the top two or three tipping point states? The analysis in your commentary is interesting but it would be nice to have that as a regular part of the site.
Thanks
The tipping point map looks very different than I remember it. Yeah, Colorado's still there, but suddenly Florida, Iowa, Montana, and even West Virginia have some impact.
West Virginia??? I know it's only 2% of the time, but in what world does it come down to West Virginia?
the mason dixon polls are useless, so forget those.
the PPP VA poll is very fresh, has a large sample size and looks very promising for obama .. almost too good to be true. does PPP typically skew democratic?
the Quinnipac CO poll is a danger sign for obama, but looks like it was taken early in the olympics when McCain was running a torrent of negative ads against the Olympics when the most people were watching [Phelps Week].
Nine Colorado polls since mid-July! The pollsters certainly agree it's a key state.
PPP is a Democratic-affiliated pollster which is why it is often listed on sites as PPP(D). Still, their general election polls this summer have looked pretty fair to me overall with just a couple pro-Obama outliers (like one in Ohio).
I wondered what effect these strnage numbers would have on the "scorecard", and I was right to assume that Obama would gain something in the electoral vote, lose some in the national vote and stay unchaged in the win percentage - because obviously Obama gained in close(r) states with more electoral votes (Arizona vs. Nevada, Colorado vs. New Mexico) and got blown away in states without any importance (Utah, Wyoming). Quinnipiac and PPP neutralize each other.
Yes, the Mason-Dixon numbers are already 10 days old and that seems so long ago by now. The sampling numbers are too low for any state more populous than Wyoming. Sometimes I wish, Nate would make his own polls....
PPP gives the Dems a 6 point party id edge in VA, hence Obama's lead there.. Funny since that state has gone red for so many years since 1962....
PPP always skews the polls for the Dems so I only take it with a grain of salt. What I do notice is Obama can't secure large leads even when his base has the heavy advantage in id....
Nothing on the CNN poll that has Clintonite support of Hillary jumping from 16% in July to 27% this weekend?
Bad, bad news for Obama.
Whoa! Did you see teh Hispanic numbers in that MD poll?
Hispanics Still Overwhelmingly Reluctant to Back McCain
by Jonathan Singer, Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:06:24 PM EST
Hispanic voters like Barack Obama and don't like John McCain. Take a look at the latest numbers across the Mountain West from Mason-Dixon (discussed as well in my last post), specifically the numbers on Hispanic voters:
Hispanic Voters in the Mountain West
John McCain (R): 25 percent
Barack Obama (D): 64 percent
These numbers track quite closely to the national numbers on Hispanic voters released over the course of the last several months. Research 2000 nationwide polling from July showed Obama leading McCain among the Hispanic community by a 65 percent to 24 percent margin -- almost exactly the same spread as was found in this multi-state polling from M-D. Pew polling also from July showed Obama leading by a similar 66 percent to 22 percent margin, NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling from June found a 62 percent to 28 percent spread, and the composite of Gallup polling from the month of May pegged Obama with a 62 percent to 29 percent lead.
At some point, presumably, the media will begin to focus on -- or at least give more than passing reference to -- the fact that McCain is uniquely weak among Hispanic voters, polling significantly behind George W. Bush in 2004 and even the anti-immigration House Republicans in 2006. Right?
Clinton voters will decide this election, filistro.
filistro--I am glad you found the ThinkProgress data useful I loved the example you gave of what the McCain's could have done with their refund check this week.
CNN has been flogging the Hillary story non-stop since Thursday. She released her delegates there is no story.
This was posted elsewhere, but is more relevant here.
The Quinnipiac CO Poll and The Mason-Dixon Polls
Quinnipiac CO poll is interesting when you get into the sub questions and shows a patter. While the race appears close on the horserace, the internals suggest an advantage for McCain.
Check this out: : “This latest survey might have more good news for McCain than might appear at first glance. Despite the closeness of the horse race numbers, he is viewed favorably 53 - 34 percent compared to Obama's 48 - 39 percent. "
There is latent support for McCain in Co and you see this in other states where McCain outperforms his horserace number and vaults over Obama in terms of favorability.
What does this tell us?
If you like him better why not tell the pollster you would vote for him?
If there are reservations what are they?
Unfortunately, Quin did not ask the leadership/commander in chief questions, instead concentrating on issues.
Obama does pretty good on energy (surprise?) and on handling a domestic crisis like Katrina (not so surprising, although McCain has used Katrina a lot to criticize Bush). He barely outpolls McCain on the economy -- within the margin of error -- and that is a surprise.
McCain's strengths are on terrorism and international crises and here his leads are huge.
Similarly, The Mason-Dixon polls uniformly shows the biggest challenge for Obama is contained in his Favorable/Unfavorable numbers relative to McCain. Even in CO where he loses to Obama, McCain has statistically significant better favorable/unfavorables that Obama.
Whither Virginia?
I wonder if the Kaine Veep speculation was artificially inflating Obama's numbers in Va and now that he finished in last place on the short list will the state begin to trend for McCain, more in line with the kind of state it is - -one hospitable to conservative to moderate Democrats, but resistant to Liberals like Obama and Biden?
I am not sure how Obam improves ll this. I don’t think the Yankee easterner from Scranton and Wilmington is the answer the Chicago pol was looking for.
It remains to be seen how rounding out the tickets and the reaction to the convention affects all this, but going into the new week, you cannot deny that Obama enters this period weakened and on the decline.
Haha, I love the increasingly esoteric reasons to explain why Obama is on the verge of fading away in Virginia. Yes, it was the phantom VP nominee all along! Even before Kaine was being cited as a potential running mate: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/virginia/virginia_mccain_49_clinton_38
Ouch...that CNN poll tonight is not good news. Lets attack the cross tabs and/or blame the MSM for being "concern" surrogates for the Republicans. We could also argue that CNN needs advertising dollars thus will try to keep this election close. Obama cannot be in trouble...I see a lot more yard signs and bumper stickers for Obama in my town.
I saw CNN talking about that, VA con. But they apparently decided a systematic, mathematical breakdown was too much for our little brains. The CNN gave that result and then said, "Based on this, the Republicans believe they can win Pennsylvania. If they win Pennsylvania, then they win Ohio. If they win Ohio, then they win Florida..." They segued from "11% more of Clinton's supporters say they'll vote for McCain" to "and this is what Republicans say that means." If the poll is accurate, here's what it does mean. About a third of the electorate is Dems. About half of those are Clinton supporters. About 11% of those say they've switched sides this weekend. 1/3*1/2*0.11=...2% of the electorate. That would make the polls dead even, since the average has Obama ahead by 1 1/2 or so. That's IF CNN's poll is accurate, and if it stands for the next ten weeks.
I also like how Biden, one of the most widely recognized centrists in the Senate, has now transformed into a 'liberal' overnight.
GOP spin machine, you do not disappoint.
Pete asks (plaintively):
"If you like him better why not tell the pollster you would vote for him?
If there are reservations what are they?"
Well, Pete.
You know I'm nuts about you. You're a funny guy. If asked by a pollster I would certainly say I like you better than Nate (whom I don't know at all, never having been a regular at DailyKos.) But if then asked whom I would choose to run a polling site, I'm afraid Nate would get my vote.
Funny things, polls. (As weird as voters, those things are.)
VA is going to go from +8 Bush in 2004 to Blue for Obama because tons of new progressives have moved into the DC 'burbs and now welcome the first AA Pres candidate with the name Barack Obama. Also Obama's ground game in VA is going to smoke McCain because McCain is an old 'coot that no one is really excited about.
I was intrigued by this internal from the ABC News/Washington Post national poll:
Obama strongly unfavorable: 21%. McCain strongly unfavorable: 22%. The Obama strongly unfavorable numbers have been trending somewhat down, the McCain numbers up. So much for negative advertising. That old standby of the Rasmussen press releases ("Opinions about Obama are more strongly held") isn't really true anymore.
Ground game. Pff.
Will you guys drop the houses thing now since it obviously didn't work very well, given that the race is STILL deadlocked?
What a silly line of attack that turned out to be. Non-story.
I see the GOPer operatives moved on over here now to continue the vconcern postings that Obama is fading...
Give it a rest, VA CON & PETE - it is tired. Or use facts & data that are relevant for a change rather than blowing hot air...
ABC News/Washington Post polls have consistently favored Obama.
I gave you facts. Clinton supporters feel dissed and are moving away from Obama according to the CNN poll.
Fillstro -- sohistry on your part, but clever.
Sedi: Have you not been paying attention, Gergen is a turncoat and is no freind of the McCain campaign. of cours ehe would piss all over the poll.
Now if you will pardon me, i will go read it. I need a fix . . .
The new USA Today/Gallup poll has Obama up by 3 with likely voters and up 4 with registered voters.
This is the same poll that had McCain ahead by 4 with likely voters in July.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-08-24-campaignpoll_N.htm
I often wish I hew the state-by-state breakdown that forms particular spikes on the frequency graph at the right. The one that now shows about a 1.75% chance of Obama getting EXACTLY some hard to read number that's about 350 electoral votes is especially intriguing.
Ok Sedi..I will concede that this poll is crap, too. And Gallup as tied today? Yes, I admit Obama is going to bounce this week but lets also admit that Biden ain't blowing off any doors. Just wanted to stir you up a little. I'm sure you will return the favor when McCain starts next week
I don't know why Obama's position is much better than Kerry's at this point.
Hes looking more and more like Kerry all the time. Just can't break out...
SarahLawrenceScott
on the tipping point scenarios, I noticed that they changed quite a bit twice today.
VA is rising fast toward the top.
CO holding near 50%, with NM & NV in the teens.
But the real story is that OH continues to slide down on as a major tipping point, and I would expect it to slide further post-convention [IMO]. Plus MI is fading as a tipping point/battleground [down to 11%] with PA almost off the chart @ 1%.
And FL holding in the lower tier tied for 7th position @ 8% with NH.
As I noted previously, there is a distinct trend alright.
The top 5 tipping point states are all RED must wins for McCain, as are 8 of the top 10.
So who has the edge in positioning & strategy ? [hint - not John]
PETE is trying to convince everyone that he knows the battle is over & Obama might as well toss in the towel.
But the facts & statistics & projections show otherwise.
Actually, the moving of the tipping points to VA & CO+NM+NV totally works in Obama's stategy for EV victory.
The fight will be centered on non-traditional RED states rather than on the old battlegrounds of OH & FL as in the last 2 cycles.
McCain & Rove should have flop sweat on their brows tonight !
The tide & worm appear to be turning against their tired old political strategem.
The polls are merely tallying views of Rush Limbaugh followers who switched to HRC during the primaries. The true Dems (many more registered than GOP in past 4 years), plus some Republicans in swing states, plus 51% of the registered independents will put Obama over the top (Kerry states + IA + CO+ NM). A wave of newly registered enthusiastic voters (i.e. ground game) will offset the small minority of disaffected HRC supporters. If McCain picks Romney, then we're taking landslide territory (VA and maybe OH - most evangelicals aren't supporting a Mormon).
VA con: Yes. But I'm comparing the ABC/WaPo polls to earlier ABC/WaPo polls.
The same effect can be seen in Rasumussen tracking polls. Very unfavorable for McCain has increased slightly while Obama has held about even. While their poll still shows that Obama still has a higher "very unfavorable" number than McCain, it is down to a difference of 8%.
McCain's been doing a good job of solidifying his base, in my opinion--better than Obama to date, clearly. But McCain needs more than his base.
Nate said:
Obama wins the election 95.9% of the time that he wins Colorado in our simulations.
But he wins the electoral vote 99.3% of the time that he does win Virginia.
However, it is nearly impossible for him to lose the election when he wins Ohio, as he takes the election 99.8% of the time that Ohio swings his way.
These statements are technically incorrect, because they imply the state outcomes are independent. For example, the last statement implies that all Obama has to do is to win Ohio, and then he was won the election. This is not correct though. The model has dependencies built in, and when Obama wins OH, he also wins PA, MI, NH, etc. Without these dependencies, he would not win the election 99.8% of the time that he wins OH.
This should be made clear when making statements like this, so as not to mislead. The following statements would be correct:
Obama wins the election 95.9% of the time that he wins Colorado and all correlated states in our simulations.
But he wins the electoral vote 99.3% of the time that he does win Virginia and all correlated states.
However, it is nearly impossible for him to lose the election when he wins Ohio and all correlated states, as he takes the election 99.8% of the time that Ohio and all correlated states swing his way.
This is an important point and unless it is understood, it will lead to erroneous conclusions about which states are most important (Hint: Its not just OH; OH is important, but it is not the only state that's important.)
VCon why don't we wait until after the convention to decide where the Clinton voters are? The drumming of The Rift and The Snub and The Outrage by the media, see The Page and CNN , is part of getting attention and framing the convention as Drama. It seems no one--including you Republicans can quite comprehend that Hillary did not win and is not on the ticket and will not be part of this election cycle. It is so so touching that all of you care so much about her now. I wager that at least half of those voters that you keep declaring are not moving to Obama will not vote for McCain once they know his record on women's issues (which are beyond abortion--health care, wages, etc) those who won't care about thee issues were never going to vote for Obama anyway. No .Matter. What.
And filistro--yes I agree! why would anybody talk about McCain's issues with the latino/hispanic vote don't you know it is Obama who has that problem? just like he was never going to get women to vote for him (another fiction). So McCain not having traction with hispanics--not news becasue it does not fit the narrative (myth) of McCain the maverick who hispanics love.
You guys kill me with this Romney/Evangelical split stuff. Evangelicals are going to vote McCain/Romney. Obama has made darn sure of that. Look, just because the Dem party is split down the middle doesn't mean the Republicans have to split, too. We support our winners...regardless.
Sedi - much love to you...VA will be very competitive but Red. My guess is +3.
VA Con:
Hes looking more and more like Kerry all the time. Just can't break out...
But Obama doesn't need to break out. If he sits where he is, he wins. (Remember 538 is forecasting further slippage, because it includes trends and assumes some reversion to demographics.)
And his position is different than Kerry in that respect. Kerry's hold on some of his blue states was tenuous, while Obama seems to have a floor of about 250 EV, barring major scandal or geopolitical event. Yes, he loses at 250 EV, but that puts McCain in the position of having very little electoral margin for error. McCain may win, but it will most likely be narrow if he does. If the Bush-Kerry election had been held a month or so earlier, Bush would have blown Kerry out. Different situations.
@ SarahLawrenceScott
The problem with the tipping point state calculation at 538 is that is emphasizes the states that are closest to 50-50 toss-ups. FL was not previously a tipping point state because McCain was in the lead. Nonetheless, FL always has had a reasonably high probability of affecting the election results simply because of the number of electoral votes it carries.
If you want a better analysis of the important states, see the Battle Rankings at election-projection.net. These numbers are computed from the conditional probability of the state swinging the election, which depends on both how close the state is and how many electoral votes it has.
dcm,
The tipping point states metric is fairly volatile, as we've seen in the previous weeks. One poll in a key state (like the current one with Obama up in VA) and states can shoot up the rankings, or fall just as quickly. Remember that Michigan used to rank highly until a few polls came out with more solid leads for Obama and it started to slip.
Don't get me wrong, the importance of some states (OH and CO especially in my opinion) isn't going anywhere, just be careful how much you read into the rankings on one particular day.
Also VACon, if Clinton still-supporters (not a word but you get what I'm saying) really will decide this election, then McCain should start picking out decor for the White House.
SarahLawrenceScott ,
I would argue that Obama is doing a better job of consolidating McCain's base.
@ SarahLawrenceScott
P.S. WV figures into the tipping point states simply because Obama is already so close to being "over the top" in most simulations. All he needs is one of many possible states to win. So any state in which he has some non-zero chance of winning can be that last state that puts him over the top.
According to CNN's post-Biden shock poll tonight, Obama has lost 7 points since the last CNN poll in July, leaving the race 47% to 47%, not good news for Obama since CNN polls are biased in favor of Democratic nominees.
The PUMAs are on the prowl.
I would love to see a West Virginia poll. I'm not so sure that it's a solid McCain state.
ALLEN
your criticism of Nate's explanation is somewhat accuarte in it's context but your description is not any more 'correct'.
Nate's scenario analysis has been explaned on this site & in the FAQ ad nauseum so all the regulars are aware that there are underlying assumptions made.
BUT your own suggested choice of wording is also fatally flawed ["and all correlated states"] by the same standards since there is not just one possible set of crrelated states.
The combination of potential EV states is almost endless in the 10,000 scenarios run.
So your technicality is overly technical & your suggested explanation is actually no more helpful to the casual reader of his post.
However, assumptions are made based on the data as to what states would be involved in every possible combination run.
Nate does a rather decent attempt to clarify the Scenario Analysis in the chart on the right side, and one can deduce what states would follow.
But perhaps Nate should reference that many of the potential scenario combinations are charted as a reference point for futher elucidation.
still, Nate & Sean presume that readers have some grasp of statistical analysis and that they are already aware of this or have read the FAQ for a more detailed explanation of how this site operates.
but your point does have some inherent validity as a suggestion on how to improve the posts for the benefit of a casual reader...
McCain won't pick Romney now. Hes going for Sara Palin and getting the PUMAS on board!
Judging from the points on the supertracker (not the smoothed trendline) it looks like these 'inputs' are shifted more than a point toward Mc compared with the national polls. So it does look like Nate's state/national calibration has gone off a little. So far as I know, the trendline may be the better way of estimating shifts in state polls for the trend-adjustment, but it's not the best way of estimating the national pop vote. It looks like that estimator needs fixing.
Palin would be a stupid choice. Putting someone in the VP slot that has a corruption scandal surrounding them in a change election is suicide.
Allen: Hmm...I'm beginning to understand WV as a tipping-point state as I think about it. It's not that it almost ever puts Obama over the top. But there may very well be scenarios where it is close, and in some sense puts McCain over the top.
Here's my reasoning. Obama wins WV 15% of the time in the current simulations. Having WV 2% of the time as a tipping point means 1 out of 7 times Obama wins WV it was an important state. That seems unreasonable, as most Obama wins in WV will be electoral blow-outs by Obama.
But McCain wins WV 85% of the time. It's plausible that one time out of forty it's a close state and an important part of McCain's 270.
@ Virginia Conservative
Will you guys drop the houses thing now since it obviously didn't work very well, given that the race is STILL deadlocked?
What a silly line of attack that turned out to be. Non-story.
Getting desperate, are we?
That gaffe happened in an interview on Wednesday, and was first pushed on Thursday, so it's been what, four days? And you expect the full impact to be reflected in polls already?
This thing has legs for another month, at least.
"I don't know why Obama's position is much better than Kerry's at this point."
In terms of the numbers game, they're pretty close. On the other hand, Obama is a charismatic candidate with an enthusiastic base of supporters, whereas Kerry was a mediocre, Lurch-like compromise choice who quickly became a laughingstock. Kerry was running as Not-Bush; McCain is running as Not-Obama. It's not that hard to see how Obama is in a stronger position than Kerry ever was.
It was unrealistic for Democrats to think they had a guaranteed landslide on their hands come November, but there's no reason for them to be crying into their pillows, either. It's going to be a close election.
With the M-D polls both NV & MN have moved red and CO toward blue. I think it's the "drill here drill now" message as it would resonate more in NV & NM because they have not experienced the impacts of the current spate of drilling that CO has seen. CO voters may also be hesitant about McCain since his gaffe where he admitted that Arizona's desire for a water grab from the upper Colorado River Basin states.
Look for Hillary to really tear into McCain on Tuesday, and Bill do the same. If the party gets unified, Obama will get about a 10 point bounce.
I said it during the primary, that it won't be racist republicans that cost this race for Obama, it will be racist Democrats. I have talked to some Democrats from the south side of Chicago who won't vote for Obama simply because of his race, and I am sure there are many like that in other parts. Despite the fact that Hillary and him have just about the same plans and policies, they are scared....it's really sad. I think many of these white Dems would vote for Dick Durbin against McCain, but won't vote for Obama.
Ergo if Kerry was that awful and Obama is so great, why isn't Obama up double digits at least?
Too bad that both Colorado polls were completed prior to McCain's statement on regional water policy. (Has he retracted that BTW?). I would love to see what Colorado looks like when that bizarre comment has been widely disseminated throughout the state.
"You guys kill me with this Romney/Evangelical split stuff. Evangelicals are going to vote McCain/Romney."
If they vote at all. Overated, you must have never seen Evangelicals and Mormons compete for converts overseas. It's pretty intense stuff. Many Evangelicals sees Mormons as cultists, and possibly satanic. If you don't think so, ask a few.
Furthermore, Evangelicals came late to Republican politics. I'm not saying that they will vote for Obama, but a lot of them will not vote, period, and particularly if a Mormon blasphemer is on the ticket.
Sedi,
That's pretty much the way I was seeing it too. With just a little less cynicism.
I just think the less taken for granted, the more accurate the picture.
Nate,
Are you going to do a meet-up or drink-up in Denver?
Water policy? How many people even know what that is? Talk about wonkish!
eponymous
on tipping point theory, I would not call adjustments with new data as 'volatile', but rather as dynamic and dependent mon the full data set input.
Now, on the otherhand the over-reliance in the past few months on Rasmussen polling for too much of the data did create it's own volatility since RR alone was able to move the statistics with 500 LV state poll much more than logic or good modeling control should allow.
But it seems apparent from many released polls across the board that the real battlegrounds have moved west of the Mississippi & VA rather than the midwest & PA, etc.
Since the most common scenarios now is the dreaded 264 - 268 EV vote for Obama, then CO & VA are correctly the real tipping point states as a snapshot projection based on the available data & trends & historic as well.
dvd--the spike around 350 EV? Let me give it a shot...Kerry+NM+CO+NV+OH+VA+FL+MT gives 341. That's probably it--all the blue and pinkish states on the map. The little satellite peak below it is the same thing without MT: 338.
Many who oppose Barack would have readily voted for Colin Powell in 1996 or 2000, so it has nothing to do with being black per se. The problem is that Barack is seen as a black with radical ties.
Barack was praised by Farakhan as "the hope of the entire world." Michelle wrote an anti-white these at Princeton.
Barack named his second memoir for an antiwhite sermon by Jeremiah in which he decried a society in which "white folks' greed runs a world in need." Barack first became a Christian by joining a black liberation theology church that sells Nation of Islam DVDs.
So it's way beyond the mere fact that he is black.
@ SarahLawrenceScott
Having WV 2% of the time as a tipping point means 1 out of 7 times Obama wins WV it was an important state.
I would not say "important state". Every state that is part of the 270 majority is an important state. The tipping point measures the states on the cusp, i.e., the states that would be part of the 270 that are closest to 50-50 in the sim run. It would be more accurate to say the WV was "on the cusp" in X% of the sims.
That seems unreasonable, as most Obama wins in WV will be electoral blow-outs by Obama. But McCain wins WV 85% of the time. It's plausible that one time out of forty it's a close state and an important part of McCain's 270.
But wouldn't it work both ways, if McCain makes 270 then he has also made his "safe states" like WV?
Regardless, I think its symmetrical (or at least it should be). My understanding is that the tipping point state is the state closest to 50-50 that would swing the election either way, so when the state goes for McCain, McCain wins the election, and when it goes for Obama, Obama wins the election. But please correct me if I'm wrong.
NO INSIGHT
what does your rant have to do with anything ?
please take your race-baiting back under the rock
your post is shameful & you are shameless to post it
DNFTT
MrInsight22!
Finally someone who gets it!!!!
I am Republican who would fall all over myself to vote for Condi Rice....or JC Watts....but I find Obama repugnant because he seems to have a contempt for America and a contempt for anyone who is successful. Not because of something as superficial as skin pigmentation. Skin color crap doesn't matter when governing.
I think the people who are pointing to disaffected Clintonista's are onto something here; A substantial proportion of Clinton-supporting Democrats are saying they'll vote for McCain. That proportion shrunk when Hillary conceded, but has increased again over the last month.
Basically if these Democrats vote for the Democratic nominee it should be a walkover for Obama but if they don't the thing's a toss-up.
So the question is what's keeping the remaining Clintonista Democrats from backing the Democrat, and what accounts for the increase this month. My guess would be that they still think the primary race is on; There's evidence (from the Rasmussen poll a few weeks ago) that a substantial proportion of Democrats - I think it was nearly 30% - still think Hillary may well win the nomination. (Buyer's remorse, Obama implosion, etc etc.) If that's the case, with the convention coming up they have every incentive to tell pollsters they won't vote for Obama. That incentive will disappear once they realize the game is over.
The alternative theory - that these people were never really Democrats in the first place - is a lot less encouraging for Obama...
Naomiii - no one is denying the tension between evangelicals and Mormons, but Romney does not wear his religion on his sleeve. He is not screaming - "I am a Mormon." McCain does not emphasize his religion, either. The party will vote for them and evangelicals are not going to sit on their hands while Obama sets the world on fire with his abortion voting liabilities. If you want to create concern about Romney you could pt to his shifting positions on core conservative issues. This has some GOPers concerned, but its all good in my opinion.
"Water policy? How many people even know what that is?"
VC, in the West, just about everyone.
ALLEN
Nate explained his Tipping Point Scenario last month in a detail post @
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/07/tipping-point-v20.html
but the tipping point states do not completely stand alone on their own...
Allen: Not exactly. The state has to be among the closest, have enough EV's with the other "closest" states to change the election, and the election has to be close. The description of the algorithm is here.
It's decidedly not symmetric. Because WV has a 538 projection of McCain +7.8, it is decidedly more republican than the national numbers. So it should be more likely to be on McCain's side in a close national election (and only close elections count).
Alright, can a westerner explain "water policy" to me?
Its pretty plentiful here so I have zero idea about this issue.
Hey, VCon!
Hot off the press, just for you... PUMAS on the prowl in Denver! Masses of them!
These are the people who will decide the election!
Insight,
Any RepubliCon who claims they would vote for Colin Powell shows an incredible lack of knowledge about him and his positions.
I guess, as you put it ypu would "fall of yourself" and other RepubliCons would to to vote for a candidate that is :
1)pro choice
2)pro affirmative action
3)pro gun control candidate
4)considers Neocons in the Bush admin a "bunch of fucking crazies"
5)tried to convince Bush no to invade Iraq on the eve of the misadventure and the consequences of occupying and invading a Muslim country
6)believes detainees have rights under the Geneva Convention, thus torture is not allowed
Should I keep going. People who float Powell are ignorant of his positions. Just b/c he served in the Bush admin he was not one of them, he was the lone voice of reason and knowledge that was ignored.
McCain's water policy gaffe was a big deal..the problem is that it happened in August and not late October. McCain is going to campaign in CO big time over the next 60 days and he has/will downplay his comments. This will fade but he better be careful going forward because it was a bonehead comment.
Nate has a new post up now on the latest CNN polling.
Virginia Conservative,
Having lived In AZ for 2 years about 10 years ago water is a consistent political issue. Water is expensive, when I was there the water bill was nearly double the electrical bill and that's running the AC 24/7 in 105 degree heat in the summer.
fall all over myself for Condi Rice, not Colin Powell.
Since I was the one who wrote the "falling" line, I thought I would clarify, I'm a conservative that wouldn't vote for Colin Powell in a primary over JC Watts or Condi......just when up against someone like Obama.
Hey, DCM in FL, don't go accusing me of being racist. I voted for Jesse Jackson in the 1988 CA primary because he gave hope to many people in distress.
I voted for Barack in the 2008 CA primary. I turned against him in March because of all his lies about his mentor Jeermiah Wright, his 4 years in Indonesia where he studied Islam in a public school, etc.
I would be glad to see McCain pick Colin Powell as his running mate.
It is "politically correct" people like you who are the true racists because you are fixated on skin color and view everything in life through the prism of race/ethnicity.
Va conserve -
The Colorado River is an essential source of water for the West. The upper states and lower states compete for its allotment/ distribution. McCain suggested that the sharing agreement may need to be revised in the coming years as populations shift and CO Dems jumped all over it. It was not a smart statement.
VA Con: I'll give you a feel for why water policy is important from a fairly "low-information" standpoint.
Although I now live in the East, I grew up in Northern California. During bad droughts, water would be rationed, to the extent that you could only shower every other day. And forget about watering your lawn--it was illegal unless you had well water. Even low information voters knew that water from the northern Sierras was being diverted to Southern California. You can imagine that it could get a bit contentious as a political issue.
As I understand it, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Arizona have the same kind of issues, but now they're between states rather than regions within a state. Touch that arrangement at your own peril--people don't like being told they can't water their lawn.
(Can people from those states confirm that I've got it roughly right?)
@ SarahLawrenceScott
Its the "tipping" that is symmetric, in the sense that the swing of the state(s) makes one candidate win and the other lose, or vice-versa if the state tips the other way.
"Naomiii - no one is denying the tension between evangelicals and Mormons, but Romney does not wear his religion on his sleeve."
No, but he wears it on his underwear! :) (Sorry, couldn't resist).
"He is not screaming - 'I am a Mormon.'"
He doesb't have to. ECs know precisely what he is. It's really a joke to me when people say Romney will help in Colorado, because there are many more ECs in Colorado than Mormons. He won't help, he will hurt.
I think it's moot, because I don't think McCain will pick him. But if Romney is the choice, we will know where to look for a Mormon on the ticket tipping this election: Southwest VA, Southern Ohio, and Colorado Springs/El Paso County, Colorado.
Not much to the CNN poll. Are internals available?
Based on Gallup all week and statistical noise we have been seeing in Rasmussen all week, this race is tied.
Biden was a negative at least in the short run b/c his selection, particularly the process has done nothing to heal the rift with the HRC voters and in fact appears to have worsened it.
We hold our breath for the conventions. What narratives will emerge?
It is likely that at least until Thursday, the Clintons will dominate the Convention with a brief break for a spate of mixed coverage on Mrs. Obama Monday night as all her negatives are brought back into focus while she struggles in her speech to contain her sharp rhetoric. Because so few have really seen her, if she stays in First Lady mode she will win over some hearts and minds, but the bloom will be short-lived.
There will be demonstrations and tangible opposition to Obama. None of this will come from the Clintons who will appeal magnanimous in defeat and slightly embarrassed by the grass roots supports they are getting from her delegate base, who she still continues to insist be allowed to out her name in nomination, even if she has formerly released them to vote as they please.
Now, that sounds like a set up to me.
Finally, Obama must give his speech on Thursday. Journalists will be expecting something new and Republicans will be listening acutely for something to pick a part.
Obama seems betwixt themes right now: Hope and Change vs. Populism and the Lunch Bucket Issues.
Will an about face seem calculated and an obvious attempt to buy votes? A desperate move, acknowledging problems? If he keeps up with the theme of how the gloom and doom of today will be lightened by the hope and change of his ascendancy, the he risks being further and permanently tagged as a man lacking substance. Somehow I don’t think he will speak of the cessation of the rise of the oceans and the planet’s incipient healing.
How hard will they hit McCain and will they land body blows or boomerang shots that backfire and leave them sounding tone death and hypocritical of previous assurances of new politics?
Finally, the venue and the setting will captivate and dominate the night of the Acceptance Speech. Will this acceptance speech have the appearance of an Olympics’' Opening Ceremony? Will it give new legs to the celebrity and arrogance memes and leave Obama's words ignored as the story again becomes stagecraft and manipulation over substance?
So much risk. Yet still the chance for great reward. Obama excels when he is center of the stage and a significant bump is to be expected from the whole shebang even if it fades like an ice cream cone melting in the hot sun of country fair during the ensuing week.
stop the stutter,
As mentioned about Powell, Rice isn't much different. Pro choice, pro affirmative action, and lost in the battle over foreign policy to Rumsfeld and Cheney. Powell and Rice by all accounts were very close on foreign policy ideas. But fall over yourself as a know all RepubliCons vote for pro chopice and pro affirmative action candidates with mnay other social liberal leanings if you actually study their history.
Allen: No, the tipping is not symmetric.
Suppose in a set of simulations that McCain gets 70%+ in 265 EV of states, not counting WV. Suppose further that his total in WV ranges from 50 - 70% in those simulations. Then in every one of those simulations McCain wins and WV is the tipping state, because if it had tipped to Obama, McCain would have lost. There is never a simulation where Obama wins, but if WV had tipped to McCain, he would have lost.
While I've obviously used artificial numbers, the actual results will have that same asymmetry.
OTF,
You're right, I haven't studied Condi Rice in depth. I always figured she was better than being for preferential racial treatment (affirmative action)....that's a bit disappointing if its true.
But I feel you are missing the point. The point is, that if you put up a candidate with conservative positions, race, religion, hair color, and everything else like that, won't sway me from that candidate.
Fair enough?
We in drought states know about water policy. We are often subject to water rationing so water is a big issue.
I just looked up Condi's positions on the afformentioned issues.
She is essentially where I am on abortion "kind of Libertarian on this issue". She is "mildly pro-choice.
On affirmative action, she only tepidly endorses it....
I think affirmative action is long past its usefulness and is used now more as a crutch. Race should not empower nor impede one's success. Period.
Sedi -
Agree on the polls. Maybe we should go back to our lives and stop making Nate so much money with multiple hits daily that drive his ad revenue. We could check back in a few weeks, but then again....
Its a great website...kind of like crack cocaine for the political junkies.
Hope you have a good night, Sedi.
MrInsight22 said...
[...]"I voted for Barack in the 2008 CA primary. I turned against him in March because of all his lies about his mentor Jeermiah Wright, his 4 years in Indonesia where he studied Islam in a public school, etc."
Without prejudice to your remark about Jeremiah Wright:
I'm a Jewish American who lived in a Malay village for 2 years and went to the local Malay-language public school, where one of the subjects was Islamic Religion. You may think that makes me some kind of extremist, but that would be a highly ignorant assumption. The Islam taught in Malaysia and Indonesia for the most part (I emphasize, for the most part) is very mild and tolerant, and a very far cry from the extremism common in the Arab World and South Asia. I think it's great that Obama lived and studied in Indonesia, because he therefore understands the Muslim world well enough to realize that hundreds of millions of Muslims are basically pro-American but aggrieved at some of our foreign policies, and he'll never confuse Sunnis with Shias or invade a Muslim country for no good reason, call it a "crusade," and run the occupation incompetently. Unfortunately, McCain has repeatedly shown his gross ignorance about Islam and the Muslim world, and such ignorance is something we can ill afford. You have to know your enemy, and just as important, know who is and is not an enemy. McCain appears to me to know neither.
@ SarahLawrenceScott
Suppose in a set of simulations that McCain gets 70%+ in 265 EV of states, not counting WV. Suppose further that his total in WV ranges from 50 - 70% in those simulations. Then in every one of those simulations McCain wins and WV is the tipping state, because if it had tipped to Obama, McCain would have lost.
There is never a simulation where Obama wins, but if WV had tipped to McCain, he would have lost.
Sure there is. Its the sim where Obama gets 70%+ of the vote in 265 EV of states, not counting WV, and gets 50-70% of the vote in WV. That sim output is less likely than the one you described, but it does exist.
Somebody mentioned Sarah Palin. There is no way she gets the nomination. The woman has been Governor for exactly 19 months. Before that she was Mayor of some Alaskan town with 8000 people. McCain is 72 years old. He can't afford to pick someone with so little experience. Palin would also get eaten alive in a debate with Joe Biden, although I don't think the VP debate is going to matter too much.
If McCain needs a female, he could pick either Jodi Rell, Governor of CT, or Linda Lingle of Hawaii, both of whom are well thought of and immensely popular in their respective states. The problem is, both are pro-choice. (Lingle is really a RINO, which you have to be to get elected in Hawaii).
Both Rell and Lingle would cause problems with the base, but they are better choices than Palin. Offhand, aside from Palin I can't think of a prominent woman politician who is pro-life other than Kay Hutchinson and Libby Dole. Both are pushing 70, though. They aren't good options either.
I guess I agree with Pete Kent on picking an ex-Ohio Congressman, although I would go with John Kasich, not Portman. Job #1 for Obama is to tie McCain to Bush, and a Portman pick by McCain would play right into Obama's hands on that score. OTOH, Kasich is a likeable, blue collar kind of guy with a strong grasp of economic issues. I think he would be an excellent VP choice. Frankly, I wish he was a Democrat.
Kasich looks like a solid choice for McCain's VP. I'm also keeping my eye on Rep. Eric Cantor, from the Old Dominion...that pick would have all the pros of Lieberman with just about none of the cons.
Dvd, that spike near 360 EVs, well, you can go to 270towin.com and play it out yourself.
SarahLawrenceScott said... Let me give it a shot...Kerry+NM+CO+NV+OH+VA+FL+MT gives 341.
She's forgetting Iowa, and you might throw in ND. Then FL with 27 and one of MO or IN with 11 each or NC or GA with 15 each gets you to 355 or 359.
Well, I wanna take all those, plus SD and AL and get into 400 seat landslide territory. I'm one who thinks this will NOT be a close election. By the end of this campaign season one side will be defeated and the people will have decided, not narrowly but overwhelmingly, for the winner.
MrInsight22 said:
"Many who oppose Barack would have readily voted for Colin Powell in 1996 or 2000, so it has nothing to do with being black per se. The problem is that Barack is seen as a black with radical ties.
Barack was praised by Farakhan as "the hope of the entire world." Michelle wrote an anti-white these at Princeton."
This is such a poor explanation. Shouldn't he been seen as the Democratic candidate? Was John Kerry seen as a "white" with radical ties to people who opposed the Vietnam War? I mean, come on, its 2008 and many [older] people still can't get over the fact that Obama is black.
Michelle Obama's thesis was not "anti-white", but for some reason when any minority talks about race they are seen as racist. The thesis was based on legitimate observations and responses from real people. I guess no one can write about race if it offends someone? Did you know that Michelle Obama's freshman roommate moved out of the room they shared because her mother didn't want her to live with a black person? Do you know how that would make a 18 year kid feel?
Ed Rendell and many other white politcians have hosted and been feautured at events with Farrakhan. Rendell, Hillary Clinton's biggest supporter, praised him for establishing outlets for youth to escape street violence. I guess Rendell can get away with that, but Obama is suddenly "beholden" to Farrakhan? Also, why is Obama being held responsible for the endorsement of someone he didn't even solicit for support? If David Duke supports McCain, does that mean that McCain is a racist and Americans should reject his candidacy?
I mean, when does the "pesonal connection" issue stop?
stop_the_stutter said:
"I am Republican who would fall all over myself to vote for Condi Rice....or JC Watts....but I find Obama repugnant because he seems to have a contempt for America and a contempt for anyone who is successful. Not because of something as superficial as skin pigmentation. Skin color crap doesn't matter when governing."
Umm...most Republicans are GOING to reject Obama anyway, just like most Republicans would reject Hillary Clinton or John Edwards. Why should we be shocked that you would vote for JC Watts or Condoleezza Rice, who everyone knows are Republicans?
Also, why would someone who finds America "repugnant" run for POTUS in the first place? That makes little sense. Also, if Obama has "contempt" for succcessful people, I guess he hates himself and millions of his supporters for being successful? I mean, COME ON. These talking points don't even make an ounce of sense.
I don't care if you don't like Obama, but doesn't it just seem a little odd that someone who supposedly hates America would run for President?
I used to really enjoy this site, but some of the people that come on here now are just intellectually braindead...
@MrInsight22
MrInsight22 is clearly a fraud. No Jesse Jackson '88 voter could support John McCain. MrInsight22 is clearly no Democrat. Being a Jackson '88 voter who supports McCain in 2008 is more irrational on the issues that Hillary '08 voters backing McCain.
@MrInsight22
MrInsight22 is clearly a fraud. No Jesse Jackson '88 voter could support John McCain. MrInsight22 is clearly no Democrat. Being a Jackson '88 voter who supports McCain in 2008 is more irrational on the issues that Hillary '08 voters backing McCain.
Hey Jon,
He has contempt for sucessful people who don't do it his way....is that better for you? If you weren't so worried about calling people braindead, I wouldn't have to spell it out for you in your alphabits.
Obama wants to punish investors (capital gains hike), punish select business sectors (oil windfall tax, but none on hollywood), and empower the government instead of the people.
I guess what I meant to say, and to make it more simple for you to digest perhaps, is that if you don't succeed Obama's way, he has contempt for you.
ALERT [as posted on the CNN Poll thread]
-----------------------------------
FYI - all those who wondered if a pollster really has their thumb on the scale [as it were]
Go over to Pollster for a fine analysis tonight By Charles Franklin - 'How Pollsters Affect Poll Results'
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/how_pollsters_affect_poll_resu.php
-----------------------------------
read the entire article, but guess who has the most 'house effect' [aka polling bias] toward McCain ???
[pause for effect]
RASMUSSEN Daily Tracker !!!
@ McCain +3
[meaning averages +1.5% HIGH for McCain with -1.5% LOW for Obama]
proof that we are not delirious !
Gallup Tracker is near the bottom also @ around McCain +2, or at the outer edges leaning toward McCain.
Harris Interactive leans furthest toward Obama @ +4.
Also the subject of how the numerous sheer volume/quantity of Rasmussen's polls leaning toward McCain therefore skews the entire data set toward McCain is in the article [again]
Find your favorite pollster & see got yourself how their polls average out in terms of weighting... FAUX & USA/Gallup lean McCain is no surprise, but some others may be but their quantity or consistency may not be as much as appears to be indicated.
Again, don't just read the toplines, study the entire analysis & charts then we csan discuss...
CNN's position may surprise - but remember they have only produced a few polls & I am do NOT believe today's CNN poll made this analysis.
NATE - please do an analysis & post on this subject/article ASAP !
Tom, I am a registered Democrat so I can vote in the primaries here in California but in general elections I vote for Republicans for President sometimes. I am an independent-minded swing voter.
In 1988, I liked Gore but he was out of the race by the time the June CA primary came along. I thought Dukakis was a sure loser and protested his ascendancy by voting for Jesse who at least gave hope to many without much hope. In November 1988, I voted for Papa Bush who carried CA over the hapless, endive-eating Dukakis.
In 1992, I was on Bill Clinton's campaign finance committee in CA and met Bill 3 times. I voted for him in 1992 and 1996, never liking Hillary.
In 2000, I voted for McCain as a cross-over in the CA primary that was temporarily an open primary that year. I hated Dumbya and voted for Gore in November 2000.
This year I voted for Barack in the CA primary before turning against him in March for his lies and his messiah complex (probably caused by being abandoned at different times by both his parents).
You don't know me and I don't know you but I have no reason to lie on an anonymous comment board. Besides, no one can "prove" how they voted anyways.
Stop_the_stutter:
I think the only thing you need to spell out is a new argument. You feel as though Obama is directly threatening or punishing "successful" people. At his income bracket, he would be giving up many of the very tax cuts that Bush enacted. These are the same tax cuts that McCain opposed in 2001, but now support.
So are you going to vote for a candidate who voted against the tax cut but now supports it for political expediency? Is McCain against "successful" people as well, or is it a thing of the past since he has embraced conservative economic principles?
Plus, McCain was rather vague about his plans for Social Security. He said payroll taxes might be on the table. Is McCain trying to "punish" successful retirees?
You clearly said in a SEPERATE argument that Obama has "contempt" for America. It defies logic that any candidate would hate the people and the country he or she hopes to lead. I don't remember any government conspirators ever throwing their hats in the ring for President.
If you're going to make ridiculous arguments, expect to be called out on them. You say you're a mainstream Republican, yet I'm supposed to be shocked you're anti-Obama and would support Condi Rice.
something worth reading, but doubtful that it's easy to implement:
Undecided Voters May Be More Decided Than They Believe They Are
We have a great opportunity here in terms of the data because in Popular Vote the candidates are tied.
This is exactly the point where tactics make the difference! Also the toss up states are those that count.
A lot is being made of the idea that states move up & down in the polls together - If you win one toss up you win them all.
That is NOT to Obama's advantage as he has potentialy multiple paths to success. Not surprisingly he is doing his best to make it untrue.
The trick is to fight each toss up state differently, atacking on localy relevent issues. That way Obama wins some, looses some but (hopefully) wins the war. All he has to do is find one or two states in which a local issue resonates, run a top rate GOTV & he might buck the national vote significantly.
McCain has to work differently. There are just too many swing states that he HAS to win. He must push hard for a general National Vote advantage & get them all out of play.
Despite the fact that the polls are tied the betting favours Obama, and I think rightly so. He has the better run campaign, better financing, and more enthusiastic supporters for a ground war.
Us Democratic supporters want a blow out, but a bare win is a win. I would give even odds if Obama was 2% down.
So, can you say? What are the odds of Obama taking one of these three: VA or CO or OH?
Ok. I live in Colorado and always have, and we dislike Arizonan's attempts to steal our water about as much as we dislike people from the East showing their ignorance of our region by suggesting water does not matter.
Water is a huge issue. Most of the water Arizona and Vegas get comes from the Colorado river which accumulates precipitation in upper basin states i.e. CO, NM, WY, UT and the biggest beneficiaries are lower basin states NV, AR, CA.
It is against water law for Coloradans to even collect rain water! as it disallows this water from running down to the other states.
We have watering restrictions frequently and try to be water conscious, but you can imagine there is some resentment when we are following the rules and Vegas and Phoenix is greener than it is here and its a frickin desert all their pools and fountains and lawns. it's not cool
Mccain said the other day in CO that the pact distributing water in the 7 western states from the CO river needs to be renegotiated, even though it just was last year and all the governors approved of it but he was too big of a moron to know about it. He also implied Arizona and NV and SoCal should be given extra water based on their inability to practice responsible growth.
It was a big mistake, and water is a big issue here.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表
水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!
Post a Comment