10.12.2008

Another Way to Look at McCain's Odds

Presently, we show John McCain with a 5.9 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, a figure that will seem implausibly low to many of you. But here's a bit of context from John Harwood at the New York Times:

In the latest Gallup tracking poll, Mr. Obama leads Mr. McCain 50 percent to 43 percent among registered voters. Mr. McCain’s deficit in that survey has remained seven percentage points or more for most of the last two weeks.

Since Gallup began presidential polling in 1936, only one candidate has overcome a deficit that large, and this late, to win the White House: Ronald Reagan, who trailed President Jimmy Carter 47 percent to 39 percent in a survey completed on Oct. 26, 1980.
There were 18 elections between 1936 and 2004, and in just one of those -- the 1980 race that Harwood mentions -- did a trailing candidate come back from a deficit this large in mid-October to win the election. One divided into 18 is 5.6 percent, which almost exactly matches our 5.9 percent estimate for Mr. McCain.

There has also been at least one other election in which a candidate made up at least 7 points worth of ground this late, albeit in a losing effort. That was 1968, when Hubert Humphrey had trailed by 15 in Gallup's poll in early October, and 8 points in late October, but wound up losing the election by less than a point. (If you want to see all these numbers for yourself, by the way, Gallup has them here).

Gerald Ford in 1976 also made up significant ground in his re-election bid with Jimmy Carter, but most of that came in August and September. By the first few days of October, Ford had already cut Carter's advantage by 2 points -- the margin he eventually lost by. Ford than made another mini-comeback after Carter's lead expanded again to 6 points, but it wasn't enough to save his re-election bid.

Harwood also mentions Al Gore's comeback in 2000, although that is harder to evaluate since the Gallup poll was exceptionally erratic that year (Gore trailed Bush by an average of 3 points over all polls that Gallup conducted that October). The Pew poll, which was far more stable, showed Gore with small leads in early- and mid- October, although Bush had pulled 2 points ahead by the end of the month.

If 1980 and 1968 do offer a couple of favorable precedents for McCain, they also come with some caveats. If 1980 is the template, it's not clear which candidate gets to play Ronald Reagan, who on the surface would seem to share more circumstances in common with Barack Obama. Although it's relatively uncommon for a candidate who is already ahead to further build his lead in late October (1936 and 1988 fit this definition, but only to a degree), there is nevertheless no guarantee that the next large momentum swing -- if there is one at all -- will favor McCain. And secondly, McCain could very easily come close without winning. The chances are significantly greater than 5.9 percent that McCain will come close enough to make Obama sweat, but like Ford or Humphrey, he might wind up a little short.

Ford, Humphrey, and Reagan, also, did not have to deal with early voting, whereas McCain is pushing back against the fact that Obama is banking votes every day with a substantial national lead. And McCain's deficit in the key battleground states exceeds that in the country as a whole, such that Obama, by our math, has the equivalent of a 1-2 point buffer zone in the Electoral College. If he were to come back, McCain's fate could very easily resemble that of Humphrey, who lost the popular vote by just seven-tenths of a point to Richard Nixon but was beaten handily among the 538 electors.

EDIT: As several commentators have pointed out, my math is a bit misleading since in not all elections did a candidate have a lead of 7 points to lose. Another way to reach the same number, however, is as follows. In two elections -- 1968 and 1980 -- did a candidate make up at least seven points' worth of ground versus where he stood in the Gallup poll with three weeks left to go until the election. That is 2 of 18, or 11.1 percent. However, if McCain were to gain 7 points on Obama, that does not mean that he'd win the election -- it means that he'd be roughly tied, and that we'd play electoral roulette. So perhaps McCain has an 11 percent chance of having a 50 percent chance of winning, which works out to the same 5.6 percent.

All of these approaches, of course, are fairly quick-and-dirty. The more rigorous way to do it is the way that our model does it, which uses just this sort of historical data to build what amounts to a margin of error on the current popular vote estimate. What I am trying to make clear, however, is that my numbers are not drawn out of thin air: it would be quite unusual (though it is hardly impossible) for a candidate to overcome a 7-point gap in mid-October and come back to win the election.

227 comments

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama!!! said...

This post is GREAT NEWS!!! FOR BARACK OBAMA!!!!!

Alex Power said...

I agree with your point, but you've made a flagrant statistical error in the opening; you assume that in all 18 elections there was a candidate with a 7-point lead. You could purely look at the swing, but that would discount the fact that winning is really the only thing that matters on Election Day.

Brian said...

5% is also the confidence interval of the entire model is it not?

Falsehood said...

I think there are new realities in terms of media and coverage in modern times that throw the old rules out the window, to a degree.

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama!!! said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/12/AR2008101201956.html

The republicans badmouthing Virginia when it is crucial to them winning the election is GREAT NEWS!!! For BARACK OBAMA!!!!!

Jonathan said...

Ha ha, I just looked at RedState for the first time in months. What a sad, sad, bunch. "Did Ayers ghostwrite Obama's memoir?"

What a bunch of fucking pathetic SOBs.

Brian said...

Er, I should say that 95% is the confidence interval, leaving a 5% chance that the model is incorrect.

Jeremy said...

What about the elections in which there was no 7-point swing this late? The sample size should be smaller than 18.

PorDem said...

This is why Dems lose, and Im a dem. Because we never know how to cheer our team to victory. We worry if a poll closes two points closer than the day before, which by statistical reasoning meant McCain had A good night. RELAX.

The race settled into the mean, DURING the weekend.

If the Democrats were a sports team and we were their fans, we'd be awful fans always waiting for an injury. He's up 5-7 nationally, don't tighten up.

Richard Song said...

"There were 18 elections between 1936 and 2004, and in just one of those -- the 1980 race that Harwood mentions -- did a trailing candidate come back from a deficit this large in mid-October to win the election. One divided into 18 is 5.6 percent..."

Nate: normally I'm a big fan of your analysis, but, C'MON, you know better than this. Out of those 18 elections did the trailing candidate HAVE a deficit this large?

I don't doubt the accuracy of the site's 5.9% estimate. Just that this particular justification is embarrassingly weak, and convolutes probability theory in a way that is beneath you.

De Montfort said...

In 1980, Reagan had his famous debate performance within a 100 hours of election day.

Johnny said...

Technically, Ford wasn't making a re-election bid in 1976 ...

pomp_ said...

Good. We need an Obama landslide to reverse all of the crippling, anti-progress legislation that was passed in the last 8 years. McCain's ideas are backward, and should be sent back to the past where they belong.

Crush the republicans. Destroy their power for the next several decades.

Librocrat said...

Is this entirely accurate though? The numbers include all elections from 1936 on, but did every election have a point where a candidate was trailing by 7 points or more? It seems many elections have been very close, so someone coming "back from that far a deficit" may not have been possible.

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama!!! said...

McCain's unfavorability numbers going higher than 50% is GREAT NEWS!!! For BARACK OBAMA!!!!!

2much2lose said...

Your story is intriguing but I wonder if the Internet changes things completely.

Gary said...

5.9% chance of McCain is still way too scary for comfort. We're talking about setting up America's footing the rest of this century. We've already blown the first 8 years. Getting America back on track is absolutely vital now, and it will take a prudent, intelligent mind, quite the opposite of McCain and Palin respectively.

Michael Histen said...

Nate, one point that you bring up a lot is the value of early voting. Can you clarify with any figures just how many votes are cast "early"? I would guess that in any given state, it's a very small percentage -- perhaps just 1-2%, if that. But, I have no stats to back that up, and I'm wondering if you could clarify.

I have a hard time believing that early voting would really have a significant effect.

Jeremy said...

Michael Histen

The thinking is that by Nov 4th, one third of the electorate will already have voted.

SHe said...

new alasskuh pole

the one 45
mcbush/failin 41

theyre loosing in palin's home stat! its over cons!!!!

SalP7 said...

Nate, also in the Harwood article it said that the Reagan deficit was before the one and only debate that year. The debate was a huge game changer.

A. Smith said...

Jeremy is pretty much right. Early voting is a major part of the vote.

However, what mitigates its effect is that the people who are likely to vote with absentee ballots are also likelier to have already made up their minds once and for all, which means there are less of the ever-important swingvoters to have voted before Obama drops (if he does, which will probably happen).

Brian N. said...

The worse things look for McCain, the more negative he'll get...

... and the more negative he gets, the worse things will look.

All Obama has to do at this point is not say or do anything stupid, and hope America doesn't get attacked...

SnowMore said...

Keep up the great work -- this is my one must-read site.

I think there are a couple of tiny errors in the Gerald Ford paragraph. First, Ford was not technically running for "re-election," since he had never been elected president (or VP, for that matter.) He was running to retain the office. Also, I think you meant to say Ford cut his deficit TO 2%, not BY 2%.

SHe said...

im telling u guys.. REVERC BRADLEE IFFECT

Shawn said...

Sorry for the cross post.

Does anyone know if Zogby's "Battleground States" Tracking Poll starting tomorrow (today now) is by state or a combined view?

Jeremy said...

ABC News poll for Monday:

Obama 53% McCain 43%.

Eat that, Drudge, and go fuck yourself.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=6017487&page=1

A. Smith said...

SHe, sources for that alaska poll?

Benjamin said...

Hang on - take a look at http://www.pollster.com/blogs/081708_1980Polls.jpg

The NY Times is being lazy - which is to be expected - but you should have picked up the slack. Reagan was behind in 4 polls out of 16 during October, according to Pollster's graph. In other words, Reagan didn't overcome a deficit - he simply jumped from being only slightly ahead to being way ahead on election day. McCain hasn't led in a singly poll so far in October. The comparison is utterly inane.

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama!!! said...

That ABC news poll is GREAT NEWS!!! For BARACK OBAMA!!!!!!

Robert said...

I think given the last eight years that even though the quantitative argument Nate made above makes a great deal of sense, qualitatively I fear that Democrats cannot start celebrating yet. I think that it will depend upon just how much mud is happening under the radar, and on how much Democrats start celebrating before they win. If Obama is perceived as really going to win this by a large margin, voter turnout may fall far enough for him to lose this thing.

Funnily enough, the transformation of Palin into Tina Fey's Palin feels more firm in the public's imagination than the somewhat fragile public image of Obama -- but Fey's partial fiction may be enough in and of itself to throw the election to Obama as I've noted here: http://reframeit.com/comments/8VeY6FKzVru

Kylopod said...

Ha ha, I just looked at RedState for the first time in months. What a sad, sad, bunch. "Did Ayers ghostwrite Obama's memoir?"

What a bunch of fucking pathetic SOBs.


I saw that on NRO also:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTlkMTdmNDRkMTM1ODZkNGNkZmRiNDFjMDE4YzRjMjg=

Antmatic said...

Enough worrying about national polls and trackers until poll averages show significant tightening. Waiting for each poll hour by hour is taking up too much of my damn time. I waited until midnight to see if this poll would confirm or deny the tracking results.

Regarding ABC, at this point, it's more important to me to see Obama's top line number than the actual gap. 53% is a good result, I don't care if McCain gets 43% or 46%.

PA John said...

@A Smith

It's a fake poll. It's someone spoofing of a poster named "He" that always post bogus polls.

Lani said...

Thanks Nate.

I must say I am so sick of the MSM talking about race. It's sickening.

Once again they are trying to frame the outcome of this election.

Fortunately as Falsehood mentioned above, old rules are out the window.

America4US said...

I just need to say something here.

First of all, these polls make me feel good as a Obama supporter. This country needs him now and not a negative campaign from McCain with the economy going to pieces.

It's really sad to see the McCain people going to such lows in their ads by completely smearing someone with flat-out lies. This is a complete embarassment for the country. If people cannot see through those lies and are not sick and tired of McCain's desperation and his constant negative attacks and elect that idiot, then they deserve to suffer what will happen in a McCain presidency. I'm sick of war, what's wrong with talking and negotiating? I think America can do better than just attacking everyone who we don't like. You can bet that McCain would go after Iran, which would probably involve Russia and the whole thing would get out of control. Start building that bomb shelter again.

From what I've seen, Republicans appear to be people of racism, love to spread hate and make sure the rich stay rich. Need I mention war too? Democrats have always had to fix the messes that Republicans make.

How many of you here have campaign burn-out? I now no longer watch the news, I get angry when I see a McCain ad and I'm already taking medications to deal with my anxiety and depression. I now just check the polls and try to avoid the news as much as possible to get me through this time! Call me crazy, but I'm sure it's starting to get on everyone's nerves, still 22 days to go. It can't come fast enough. Obama has to make this a good last debate coming up. I am definately not a racist, it's time for America to make history. Thanks for reading and your time!

Brian Finifter said...

How does the Dewey/Truman election fit into this model?

noiateerickson said...

Does anyone know when that +10 Obama ABC poll was conducted? Over the weekend? I can't find it anywhere...

A. Smith said...

@PA John

Ah, thanks. I thought that was Real Joe's job, with his fake tracker... Although he has converted, recently. Heh. I need to LURK MOAR, as they say in the internets.

mc9cain said...

Is there a STepper getting some "pole" numbers in Alaska? :)

Torrance Stephens - All-Mi-T said...

wonder if America is ready for a black president, or will it show the true racial legacy of the icemans inheritance

David Brown said...

Living in WA state, I'd say early voting can make a huge difference as most folks here vote by mail. In neighboring OR you can ONLY vote by mail. We send our ballots in as soon as we receive them as do most of our friends (less chance to misplace them).

We should be getting our ballots this week.

Fresh2death 4 Life said...

John Harwood is a top notch pundit, but this article leaves much to be desired. He may be right that essentially this election could be one of the special ones. However, this election is something no one has ever seen, we've got internet (which allows us to see all information), we've got many polls, we've got one of the best funded campaigns EVER, and we've got a Black Man running! This election breaks all the rules.

newsfromOH said...

Given his track record, McCain is more likely to disintegrate now. As Times Online notes:

John McCain picked Sarah Palin, called Obama Britney Spears, suspended his campaign in the middle of a financial panic, unveiled a completely loopy mortgage bailout scheme on live television last week and explodes on cue like a microwaved bag of popcorn.

Roger said...

So far, Obama's climb on the Super-Tracker shows no sign of leveling off. Which means that McCain's attack ads aren't working.

McCain's current strategy (if he has any) isn't to win over Independents -- he's already lost them, and is actively driving them away. Instead, he's trying to whip up his (or to be accurate, Palin's) base), in the hope that they'll actually bother to vote on Nov 4th, rather than staying home despondently. Which means he's lost, and he's trying to use fear and racism to limit the damage. But again, he's thinking tactically not strategically -- while that might reduce the size of the loss in 2008, he's driving away many moderate Republicans, some of whom have never previously voted Democrat, but after this week will be voting for Obama. Which in 2012, will make it easier for the Democrats to attract them again.

Shawn said...

@SHe - I love your Parody of a Troll. Actually I think you might be a Parody of a Parody Troll. I'm not convinced HE is for real. But the spelling errors in your posts really nail it for me!

Antmatic said...

ABC Poll was conducted wednesday - saturday

Jeremy said...

According to the PDF file on ABC, the poll was conducted on Saturday 10/11.

oct said...

McCain is no Regan.

A 1 in 20 is not really very good odds last I checked.

Paul said...

This election breaks all the rules.

i just had an awful idea for a porn site...

Rachel said...

the race is far from over

Frank said...

Yeah, I am not so sure of the logic underlying this metric but the 5.9% of the model seems solid.

If anything, I would tend to think the model is being conservative in its 5.9% estimate since it has no domain knowledge about just how focused everyone is on the economy and the effect of that on the candidates. There are very few events that could take over the news headlines right now.

Sorry to be off-topic but, what are the polls people want to see?

I would like to see senate polls for KY, GA, MS, OR, TX.

mc9cain said...

I'm glad I stayed up for the ABC poll. YEA!!!
Charlie Gibson - Looks like YOU are the only one still worried about flag pins and capital gains taxes. Just a word of warning a few weeks out: if Obama becomes President, he will make you wear an ENTIRE suit of flag pin flair before you are allowed to interview him. Every time. Watch Office Space to see how to wear your flair. Get your suits ready.

noiateerickson said...

Thanks antmatic and Jeremy!

SHe said...

NEW POLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SHe daile trackker pole

the one 67
mcbush 31

nebraskuh pole

the one 50
mcbush 47

pencilvania pole
the one 70
mcbush 25

dacoata pole
the one 45
mcbush 40

texis pole
the one 45
mcbush 44

iowewa pole
the one 80
mcbush 10

iduhoe pole
the one 61
mcbush 37


its over cons!!!

Trout Chevy Pike Palin said...

Robert said...

Funnily enough, the transformation of Palin into Tina Fey's Palin feels more firm in the public's imagination...


It's because she is a caricature in real life.
http://community.adn.com/adn/node/132625
Palin: "Well, I’m very very pleased to be cleared of any legal wrongdoing … any hint of any kind of unethical activity there. "

Also the day is over, how much do I owe to the DNC? Did anyone count RWC posts? (I think there were about 40) If I pledge tomorrow I think I'll go with $1 per post because "that one" is really chatty (or works for the DNC and Obama).

Mark said...

Misstep by camp McCain today.

This morning on MTP (or one of those shows) Lindsay Graham suggested that McCain would be unveiling a new economic program tomorrow. Turns out he was wrong

OMG this has to be the worst campaign ever. Go on national television and promise to unveil a new plan and then...do nothing.

He said...

As a Marine who is currently fighting in Iraq in the Green Zone, I urge all veterans and people who support our troops to vote for a REAL HERO, and that man is John Sydney McCain.

Everyday here in Iraq, when I am not parachuting from my Apache Helicopter into enemy lines, and engaging the terrorists with hand-to-hand combat skills and blowing up their base with my rocket launcher and machine guns, I am giving candy to children and see the love that these Iraqis have for the US Marine Core, our great preisdent, and John McCain.

Not a day goes by when I hear happy Iraqis chanting "John MCCAIN! John MCCAIN!", because they know he is a leader and a hero, not a terrorist and a zero like Hussein Obama.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!
MCCAIN/PALLEN 08!
PALLEN/THOMAS SOWELL (black conservative) '12 & '16!

oct said...

Really the election now is about the Senate. I agree.

MN, NC, GA, KY, OR, MS are all very close and may have been modestly adjusted by the recent financial fall out.

K. Joy said...

The gloat-fest going on here is absolutely unreal. hey, before you guys polish off the Dom Perignon that has most certainly been dispensed in abundance here tonight, I remind you all that our grascious host was predicting a solid Kerry victory in 2004. How's President Kerry's reelection bid doing this time arounds? yeah exactly. Uh, guys, this polling you're worshipping is a proverbial bids of goods. please prepare yourselves for some disaapointment on 11/5.

oct said...

What is the He Troll anyway? A computer script. Anyone know?

ktperson said...

Hubert Humphrey was the man. Would have been a tremendous President.

Worth Noting that Humphrey made that ground up because Lydon Johnson had his own October surprise. A week before the election he halted the bombing of North Vietnam and Humphrey surged in the polls.

Fresh2death 4 Life said...

LMFAO... "The Marine Core"... as if...

Rachel said...

mark how did you hear they wouldn't be revealing a new plan?

MATT J. H. said...

OK Poll Nazi's, you've got your fix for the night. We should stop fretting polls and allow Nate to do the analysis.

noiateerickson said...

K. Joy

Please direct me to any data that shows we were doing the same in 2004. Most rational people in 2004 (myself included) knew that Kerry was the big underdog. He trailed in almost every poll in October. He was even down 5 in PA in a couple polls. This year, McCain is in an even worse position than Kerry was in October of 2004....and Obama in a better position than Bush...

oct said...

@k.joy

You should study Ras's numbers and RCP map, too. Ain't all that Blue pretty?

Imagine a filabuster-proof Senate too my friend.

DNFTT (sorry)

carlitox2004 said...

Just a note: Ford was never up for re-election.

He served out Nixon's term and was then up for election. He was never elected either Vice-President or President and could not, thus, by definition run for re-election if he had never been elected in the first place.

Jeremy said...

Hey "He"

If the Iraqi's want John "Sydney" McCain and "Pallen", they can have em, coz over here in the US of A no one is buying their big bag of bullshit.

And you're in the Green Zone as much as Sarah Palin is under my keyboard sucking my dick.

David Brown said...

The whole idea of rolling out a new economic plan 3 weeks before the election has been pretty well panned by both conservative insiders and most of the media. But to announce that you were going to do something erratic and half-baked, then not do it might actually make McCain look MORE erratic and half-baked.

newsfromOH said...

Encouragement in the ABC finding that:

"Just 29 percent of his own supporters are "very enthusiastic" about his campaign, the fewest since August and down a sharp 17 points from his post-convention peak. By contrast, 63 percent of Obama's backers are very enthusiastic, steady since September. "

In 2004, the crazy base was motivated to the polls by gay marriage issues. Having blown their wad there, Goppers only have their candidate to lure them to vote . . . On the other hand, this poll and this site show that Obama supporters seem to be anything but indifferent about voting. If anything, I'd say we border on fevered paranoia and will be making calls until the polls close on 11/4!!!

tangoclose said...

I'm no expert on statistics, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. (A non-mean tone would be appreciated, though.)

But don't statements like:

"What about the elections in which there was no 7-point swing this late? The sample size should be smaller than 18."

... come dangerously close to suggesting that "having a 7-point lead in October" and "winning the election" are independent events?

I mean, taken to its logical conclusion, that might mean that since we have no data on 60-point leads in October, we should just assume 50-50 if there were one. Or if there was a 14-point lead, and (hypothetically) one out of the two 14-point leads historically was a historically unprecedented come-from-behind victory, we should assume 50-50 from the data. (Never mind if leads much, much smaller than this have been shown to be nigh insurmountable.) Neither seem reasonable to me.

My impression was that Mr. Silver's calculation was a back-of-the-envelope calculation, never meant to be textbook rigorous, that was just meant to highlight the gist of the situation.

SHe said...

OBOMBA/BUYDEN 08
OBOMBA/HILAREE 12

new hawhyee pole

the one 97
mcbush 1

Mark said...

Rachel, here is the link

clicky

Trout Chevy Pike Palin said...

Torrance Stephens - All-Mi-T said...

wonder if America is ready for a black president


Obama is not black he is bi-racial. He was in the womb of a white woman for 9 months. That should count for something, non? Or do we only care about who gave the sperm?

Joey said...

This morning on MTP (or one of those shows) Lindsay Graham suggested that McCain would be unveiling a new economic program tomorrow. Turns out he was wrong


Where's your link, Mark?

I'm reading the CNN article about it. It was on Face The Nation. And according to this, he didn't say tomorrow, he said over the next three weeks.

"McCain surrogate Lindsey Graham said Sunday that the Republican nominee will unveil new proposals to "jump-start the nation's economy" over the final three weeks of the presidential campaign.

"I think it goes along the lines of, now's the time to lower tax rates for investors, capital gains tax, dividend tax rates, to make sure that we can get the economy jump-started," the South Carolina senator said on CBS's Face the Nation."

A. Smith said...

Ok, SHe and He, you can stop giving examples, I get it now ;)

Kieran said...

One key distinction between this year and years past (particularly 1980) is the number of undecideds. Reagan gained significantly, but at this point in that election, fully 14% of the voters were not committed to either major candidate. The Anderson voters peeled off in considerable numbers towards the end, which is predictable once it was clear he was a lost cause. By contrast, at this point, Obama is already above 50 in the Gallup. This campaign has been going on for nearly two years, and the voters have largely made up their minds about the two major candidates. Some might be convinced to switch (as some did in 1980), but that's a different thing that convincing the uncommitted (who traditionally break against the incumbent anyway) or those supporting a fringe candidate destined to lose. McCain faces a much different, and more difficult, environment.

Tim said...

He is a true Obama supporter, every time he trolls a thread, people run out to donate. I suppose He didn't have enough funds himself, or else maxed out already.

Troy said...

@k.joy

Um, no. This is 538's first election season.

SHe said...

IMPORTENT NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SHe poleing inc. will releasse new poles for all stats and the districkt of culumbiuh tomorow at 5 pm!!!!

Andrew Lee Younkins said...

I would also point out that no matter what the national polls say, Obama has an electoral advantage (see the odds of either candidate winning w/o winning a majority vote, Obama is up 5:1 there). I dunno the methodology of the 5.9%, but it's certainly crap if it doesn't account for electoral politics. Therefore, I'm going to assume that 5.9% is based on the electoral map, and thus, it seems like a reasonable number.

I would like someone to tell me exactly what is going to happen that will change the nature of this race. I can think of one possibility, of course, and it involves a major military conflict, but it would have to be something a LOT bigger than, say, Georgie/Russia- not too likely. So what else? And don't someone say "a lot" because you need to offer something of reasonable likelihood that ALSO helps McCain.

Shawn said...

Okay now I'm sure "He" is a Parody Troll.

K. Joy said...

This site is a pure unadulterated mutual hand job. It reminds me of the McGovern staffer who after the landlside 1972 defeat of McGovern by Nixon stated "I don't know how that happened, I don't know anybody who voted for Nixon."

Expect the polls to tighten from here on out. Why the hell is Obama campaigning in Pennsylvania this weekend when all polls have him up significantly over McCain? Could it be that the Obama internals show PA is in-play. (maybe O isn't selling to all those blue collar folks who are clinging to their guns and religion)


and by the way, True or False: In 2004 Nate Silver was predicting a resounding Kerry victory? (watch, i 'm going to be banned now).

Linden said...

I love how SHe has switched sides.

Lani said...

I'm watching Head of State with Chris Rock on TBS. It is hilarious! Very prophetic.

The campaign in the movie is just like our current race for president.

Chirs Rock's opponent (a war hero) said he was gonna whoop his ass! Hmmmmmm. Sounds familiar.

ic170 said...

to K. Joy,

Check www.electoral-vote.com

If you look for "this day in 2004" and alter the url / dates to each day from Oct01 - Nov 03, you'll see the up and down nature of 2004 compared to now.

The swings between JK and GWB were almost daily at times; one day Bush at 287 next day JK at 312 etc etc.

Also Kerry had for the most meagre 1pt leads in mosts of the red to blue swing states and was on some days losing states like WI, MI, PA, NH & drawing in NJ during the Aug - Oct period, so there was no overall leader.

Oh Yeah I for one am not going YEEEEESSS just yet. Not after 04 - Totally focused. :)

Alan said...

I would be interested in seeing what the percentages are under the old model - in other words, is Obama better off today than yesterday, without changing the means of evaluation.

Robby said...

All good things, He, all good things...

Everyday here in Iraq, when I am not parachuting from my Apache Helicopter into enemy lines

Definitive proof that He is trolling for lulz.

Well done, sir; you had me going for at least a few days!

Mark said...

click

sorry, i must have done the ole herf instead of href

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/us/politics/13plan.html?ref=business

Well, maybe Graham didn't say tomorrow. But read the article for a good laugh.

Helen said...

Hahahahaha "He" is funny!!!!! :D Thank you for the laugh before bedtime :). Giving out candy!!!

newsfromOH said...

If there's a crisis of any sort, McCain will go all drama queen and look like an idiot. Obama will come up with a calm and reasonable response . . .

About the only danger I see is if McCain actually "gives up" and, as a result, ratchets himself (and his rabid dog, Sarah) down, thereby appearing rationale for the first time since August.

Logan Smith said...

This completely ignores the context of the Iranian hostage crisis, the only reason Reagan won. When you add that to the equation, there's no possible comparison -- McCain doesn't have a prayer.

SHe said...

sneek peak at 2morro's arkcansauce pole

the one 75
mcbush 20

Wa7th said...

What I am trying to make clear, however, is that my numbers are not drawn out of thin air....

.. they are tortured out of our long-suffering data hamsters.

Upon Further Review said...

Um, I know it's DFTT day (and Happy Thanksgiving to our Canadian friends), but I can't resist:

K. Joy,

This site didn't exist in 2004.

But other than that, you're doing great. Stage two of the seven stages of grief. Can't wait to see you when the Anger hits. Should be entertaining.

K. Joy said...

ic170 and you are a prudent man for that. Prudence, that I might add, is in no way shared by the majority of posters on this board.

btw, what on earth is with the massive national advertising happenintoday by Obama---does he really need to be spending some of that massive cash to adverise during the Chargers/Patriots game (i.e. California/Mass. demographic??) Not exactly someone I want in charge of the budget, if you know what i mean. . . . .

Troy said...

Logan,

Good point. Hostage crisis = economic crisis = BAD NEWS!!!! for the incumbent party.

mc9cain said...

Nate,
Thanks for the extra post tonight. We appreciate your hard work.

Y-J said...

Good news. I do agree with you, though, that this election will still be a nail-bitter in the end, even if Obama does win. Realistically, Indiana, Missouri and possibly North Carolina as well will end up close but break for McCain. I have a nagging feeling that Ohio and Florida will break red as well, but that Obama will win the Kerry States + Iowa, NM and one or a combination of (VA/CO/NV).

That said, why has McCain been spending so much time in Iowa and even New Mexico lately?! If I were him, I'd spend a day or two in Indiana, North Carolina and Missouri. Spam adds in Florida, and focus my efforts in Virginia, Ohio and maybe New Hampshire (if the internal polling becomes more favorable). That seems like the electoral path of least resistance to me. What the hell is he doing?!

Helen said...

SHe,

Huh, I guess sending Hillary out there was a dang good idea, then! Seems to have worked, yabetcha! ;)

John said...

He said...

"Marine Core"

HAHAHAHAH

You've just been found out, idiot.

Yet another disgusting McCain supporter lying about being in the military.

K. Joy said...

I didn't say THIS site predicted a Kerry win in 04. I said Nate Silver, the proprietor of this site did. Wow, a lot of perry Mason's here tonite. . .

Adam said...

K.Joy babbled:

"This site is a pure unadulterated mutual hand job. It reminds me of the McGovern staffer who after the landlside 1972 defeat of McGovern by Nixon stated "I don't know how that happened, I don't know anybody who voted for Nixon."

Actually, it's a sober data analysis site with a predominately Obama-supporting commentary. You should have read the comments here when Nate had Obama at ~40% at the peak of the Palin bump.


"Expect the polls to tighten from here on out."

Of course. That's why Nate factors that into his equations. Notice the "snapshot" and "projection" lines for each state; that's his predicted tightening, since most elections do.

"Why the hell is Obama campaigning in Pennsylvania this weekend when all polls have him up significantly over McCain? Could it be that the Obama internals show PA is in-play. (maybe O isn't selling to all those blue collar folks who are clinging to their guns and religion)"

Probably because his primary focus is winning, not winning 400 EVs. It was probably already scheduled for a couple weeks too. Sure it'd be cool to see him in Georgia and Texas, but as you said, elections tend to tighten. I doubt his internals are much different than the +10-12 almost every poll gives him there, though.

"and by the way, True or False: In 2004 Nate Silver was predicting a resounding Kerry victory? (watch, i 'm going to be banned now)."

Nate was not in the political blogging business in 2004. I can't think of anyone that predicted a "resounding" Kerry victory though, as he was behind in the polls almost the entire last few weeks. Those who predicted a Kerry victory at all were mostly saying the polls weren't picking up the cell phone factor and youth turnout. Turns out, Kerry just wasn't that exciting a candidate and Republicans had a better GOTV effort.

Oh, and there's no banning here. It's not an echo chamber.

Wa7th said...

Logan Smith said...

This completely ignores the context of the Iranian hostage crisis, the only reason Reagan won. ...there's no possible comparison -- McCain doesn't have a prayer.

No kidding. Everyone has hostages these days.

cincyr said...

A couple people have already mentioned the debate between Reagan and Carter held one week before the election, on October 28, 1980. Many believe this is what changed the race and led to a Reagan landslide in the election a week later.

So, perhaps McCain could perform exceedingly well next Wednesday but there'd still be 19 more days to go until election day.

And as the pundits keep reminding us everyday, a week is like a year in politics.

Shawn said...

I'm giving up on a Zogby after midnight poll refresh. G'nite all.

Mammoth said...

Mcmummy can eat a char broiled dick vein!

And a buffalo jizz milkshake!

IS RASMOOSEN REPO????

Adam said...

"does he really need to be spending some of that massive cash to adverise during the Chargers/Patriots game (i.e. California/Mass. demographic??) Not exactly someone I want in charge of the budget, if you know what i mean. . . . ."

No, I don't know what you mean. There quickly reaches a saturation limit with political ads; if you see one every commercial break you just tune them all out. He's running national ads it's good for a mandate to get as large a win as possible. I'm proud my donations could be used so people in deep red states can see him.

oct said...

He is some kind of bot that posts misspelled crap.

SHe said...

1 moor poll b4 i go 2 bed

louiseeanna pole
the one 55
mcbush 35

JDA said...

To those questioning the "7 point swing sample size":

I think what Nate is referring to (correct me if I'm wrong) is not elections in which one candidate was necessarily leading by 7 points, then was overtaken. I think he's saying that in 2 out of 18 elections, there was a 7-point swing in either direction this close to the election, regardless of whether that made up a deficit or not. So if Obama is +7 and goes to +14, that would count. Or if Obama is +10 and goes to +3, that would still count.

K. Joy said...

Y-J If you want to see where the campaigns really believe the battlegrounds are, you follow where they go. if McCain is in NM and IA, his internals are telling him something that the MSM is not telling you, that is, that those states are in play for GOP holds this year. It is similarly telling that Obama is campaigning HARD CORE in PA this weekend. Not exactly the play from a campaign that truly believes they are up 7 points nationally or even significantly state wide in PA.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you gotta concede that Obama at this stage of his campaign should not be having to shore up PA.

Adam said...

cincyr,

The important part most people don't note about the 1980 election is that that was the *only* debate held that year. Reagan was seen as a celebrity who people didn't really know, and for much of the country that debate was the only time they saw Reagan in any kind of political setting.

They've seen both Obama and McCain, on the other hand, over and over at this point. Swings one direction or another seem very unlikely at this point based on a debate; there's simply not much in people's minds that can be changed other than their comfort level with Obama, which is fairly settled already after the first couple debates.

Jeremy said...

K Joy

Some cheese with your whine?

Honestly, go jerk off to your McCain screen saver and stop being such a bitter little pussy. You're in for eight years of an Obama presidency so better save some Prozac for when you'll really need it. Now, as your single digit IQ Veep would say, shoo!

Joey said...

Also Kerry had for the most meagre 1pt leads in mosts of the red to blue swing states and was on some days losing states like WI, MI, PA, NH & drawing in NJ during the Aug - Oct period, so there was no overall leader.

This is true. I am from NJ and I remember on Election Day and the day before I carried a sign at school that said "NJ IS NOW A SWING STATE"

Caused quite the ruckus but the polls had it very close.

Adam said...

K.Joy,

"if McCain is in NM and IA, his internals are telling him something that the MSM is not telling you, that is, that those states are in play for GOP holds this year."

No, I don't actually believe that. I think they're just running a clueless campaign. Republicans from all corners (including his former campaign chief) are slamming him for his boneheaded strategic decisions like going into Iowa. Not every decision campaigns make is a good one, Obama's included. That being said, I'll take a candidate who goes to a state they're up 10 in over one they're down 10 in any day.

SHe said...

wait no theres 1 moar pole

weest virgineea pole
the one 50
mcbush 47

mc9cain said...

RE: Lindsay Graham - they were going to announce the new economic proposal tomorrow but that interfered with Lindsay announcing on Monday that he was coming out.

Seriously, why would they announce it "within the next 3 weeks"?! Does he realize his "fundamentals" will be finished voting by then?

Tokar said...

Its important to point out that Obama has GAINED 4 points in that ABC/WaPo national poll. 9/29 he was at +6. Now he is at +10.

Phoeflame said...

does he really need to be spending some of that massive cash to adverise during the Chargers/Patriots game (i.e. California/Mass. demographic??) Not exactly someone I want in charge of the budget, if you know what i mean. . . .

No wonder McCain is getting crushed...his supporters are as ignorant as his campaign managers. The Chargers/Patriots game is a national one. You know, Sunday Night Football--Al Michaels, John Madden? The one everyone from Alabama to Alaska watches in their local sports bars?

By the way, the last debate which took place in Tennessee? Lots of people NOT from that state actually saw that too. That crazy national television!

o_0

Jeremy said...

McCain is in IA and NM because his campaign is a fucking joke. He'll be spending the next few days in New York. Again, a joke.

He knows he's lost so all that's left now is to put up some bullshit charade of fighting on Obama's turf, coz it makes his lower 40's fan base happy. Big whoop.

Alyssa said...

Where's Inkstain?
I always liked his commentary. Smart and rational guy.

oct said...

I think McCain wants to distance himself from Lindsay Graham. Graham is a liability these days--he is the master of deregulation.

mc9cain said...

SHe - I think you covered the Red states tonight fantastically. The Libs can go to bed knowing the one doesn't even need to campaign there to win.

Adam said...

Oh, and here's Kristol today on McCain's campaign. If he of all people is saying this, you can't realistically think McCain is making good judgments re: Iowa etc.

"The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic. If the race continues over the next three weeks to be a conventional one, McCain is doomed."

Wa7th said...

if McCain is in NM and IA, his internals are telling him something that the MSM is not telling you, that is, that those states are in play for GOP holds this year

More likely his innards are telling him two more people haven't paid dearly enough yet for screwing him over in the past.

newsfromOH said...

Maybe he's going to try to buy time like Obama did for a last minute economic policy change . . .

oct said...

McCain lost IA by not supporting the Ethanol subsidy (and railing against it.)

Obama has a very strong organization in IA. Therefore, McCain = NUTJOB.

Marc said...

Another interesting way of thinking of this (though, I'm not sure if somebody else already brought this up) is that McCain's chances of winning the election right now are roughly the same as Obama's chance of winning a state like Arkansas or Louisiana! In other words, if current trends hold, it will *not* happen.

Joey said...

Maybe he's going to try to buy time like Obama did for a last minute economic policy change . . .

He can't afford that.

oct said...

Inkstain has been MIA. He is insightful more so than Mrinsight22 I think.

broberts said...

Nate is getting a lot of press these days, http://nymag.com/news/features/51170/

Helen said...

I don't know if there has been a post addressing this alreday by Nate, but how much of a factor are demographic shifts over the past 4 years? Not to be morbid but, say, old people dying off and new people turning 18?

SHe said...

oughly the same as Obama's chance of winning a state like Arkansas or Louisiana! In other words, if current trends hold, it will *not* happen.

nononononnonono havent u seen mii arcansauce and louiseeanna poles?

mc9cain said...

Adam,
Yeah, the same Bill Kristol who handpicked Sarah Palin. What a complete ASSHOLE Coward.
http://www.jossip.com/bill-kristol-is-the-man-behind-genius-sarah-palin-as-vp-concept-20081010/

This rat keeps having to jump off every ship he sinks.

Wa7th said...

My frien...*click*

Dunx said...

Being an ex-pat Brit I have to say that this election reminds me mightily of the British general election in 1997: all the polls said it would be a Labour landslide, and then there was a Labour landslide (or, as one commentator put it on the night: "This isn't a landslide. This is an asteroid hitting the earth and destroying all life").

I'm really hoping this is how things turn out for the Dems this time, rather than the crushing disappointment of the 1992 British election: all the polls had Labour ahead, the Tories really didn't expect to win, and then Labour threw it away by holding a victory rally on the eve of the election. The British do not like triumphalism.

So, Mr Obama - be serious in your last minute half hour time slot. Do not gloat. Americans may be more tolerant of triumphalism than the British, but for pity's sake don't throw it away.

Jeremy said...

Does anyone else expect a Powell endorsement of Obama down the pike, especially with all the race baiting that's been going on?

Phoeflame said...

as one commentator put it on the night: "This isn't a landslide. This is an asteroid hitting the earth and destroying all life"

And that is why the media in Britain is so much cooler than the media here.

mc9cain said...

I thought Powell was playing footsie in an igloo with Stevens last week? No?

Rachel said...

I expect a Powell endorsement if they bring out rev. wright.

Yeh the inkstain is very insightful.
I think he stopped coming around once the race became "uncompetitive"

Marc said...

I doubt Powell will endorse either way. Not that it would matter very much if he did.

Rachel said...

Zogby
M44
O48

New Mexico Matt said...

In baseball terms it's the bottom of the 9th, two outs and the pitcher is batting.

Adam said...

Is that the Zogby where Obama leads by 21 among independents? Goes without saying, but you *really* have to wonder about credibility with that kind of final number.

Rachel said...

out of the Zogby poll, this is all that matters:

Obama retains a substantial 17-point lead among independent voters, but that edge receded from 21 points yesterday. In terms of securing their political bases, both Obama and McCain are doing well. Among Democrats, Obama wins 86% support, while McCain wins 88% support among Republicans.

Yvonne said...

huffpost reports a record fundraising month in September, no number though.

DCM in FL said...

do NOT worry about FL - it is going BLUE in 2008 IMHO

enthusiasm is now sky high, and the GOPers in FL are already in the early stages of acceptance of defeat

Obama ads are everywhere - but optimistic & friendly.

Mac ads are mean & nasty & ugly & turning off even his supporters...

Gov Crist dropped off the McCain trainwreck this weekend too - he saw the inevitable outcome & does not want to further tarnish his own favorables by associating further with John or Sarah

Crist reportedly told the GOPers that he would have to concentrate on the sad state of the FL economy rather than campaign for the ticket
-----------------------------------
Crist has also stated that he will not campaign to support the FL anti-gay marriage ammendment #2 on the ballot

the GOPers had put it on this year to drive their base to support McCain et al, but it may now be a losing proposition - or marginally effective at best

it is not getting traction as a wedge issue as hoped, and now is getting a bad rep as discriminatory by the hateful right-wingers because it will outlaw all straight & gay partner benefits of any sort - which hurts common-law marriages & especially seniors cohabitating

plus the GOPers overplayed their hand earlier by rejiggerring the FL constitution to require a 60%+1 vote to ammend.

this hateful proposition will have trouble breaking the bar at 60%,but it will probably easily get 50%+

but it is getting no airplay or support except perhaps to the choir from the self-proclaimed 'christian' church pulpits... WWJD ???

anyway, the prevailing winds in FL are now blowing BLUE

the swing district here is central FL along the I-4 Corridor from Tampa to Orlando to Daytona

I drove from near Daytona into Orlando today along the I-4. more visual & vocal support for Obama than McCain as evidenced by a HUGE highway billboard on the I-4 outside Sanford headed toward Orlando & the 'attractions'

simply said 'McSAME' in huge letters with a red circle & the NO stripe across it... 'NO to McSAME'

no mention of Obama - but extremely effective messaging & every single traveler on that road will see it until election day

FL will say NO to McSame

plus it is anticipated that approximately 40-50% of the FL votes will be cast BEFORE Nov 4th through absentee [already underway] & early voting [starts 10/20]

in my county [Volusia] in 2004, 19% voted by absentee ballot & 18% in early voting at the polls = 37%.

county supervisor of elections estimates 50% of allvotes will be cast early in 2008

plus the election offices got bombed last week with last minute voter reg apps - with a strong DEM advantage noted...

they said they will have trouble processing all the thousands of new voters before 10/20 as mandated

people are anxious to vote out the bums on Nov 4th

PLUS - only 99 more days until BUSH is finally shown the door of the WH & given the boot !!!

Wa7th said...

In baseball terms it's the bottom of the 9th, two outs and the pitcher is batting.

Too late for a sprinkler malfunction. Call designated hitter Bugs Bunny.

Adam said...

Yeah, Rachel, using R2K's partisan breakdown gives roughly an 11-point lead with Zogby's numbers. He has to be using something close to like 40R 40D 20I to come up with that, which is patently ridiculous.

mc9cain said...

That's a REALLY good write-up about Nate. Whoever wrote that is pretty damn good at his profession. Now the photographer is another thing...why didn't he tell him to tuck in the shirt? That ain't right. I have to finish reading it in the a.m. Have a good night all.

Rachel said...

I think the Obama campaign was teasing the number to step on any "new" proposals from McCain tomorrow.

Rachel said...

"One official close to the campaign said that September's fundraising haul set a new record, surpassing the $66 million Obama raised in August. Another aide, asked about the campaign's take, would only describe it: "big.""

KIC said...

Saw this quote today:


Likewise, Team McCain said it hasn’t been tempted by the recent polls to pull out of Pennsylvania like it recently did from Michigan, where polls had showed Obama leading McCain only by high-single-digit margins.

"We pay attention to our own polls," Mark Salter, a senior McCain aide told reporters Saturday. "Pennsylvania looked much better than Michigan.",


Would love to know what their polls look like.

Jeremy said...

I read an estimate that Obama's haul is in the neighborhood of $100 mill.

Michael said...

I think you mean Ford's election bid. Ford was never elected President or Vice-President; he was appointed to the Vice-Presidency after Spiro Agnew resigned.

oct said...

People are coming out of the woodwork to donate to Obama. Repubs must be shitting themselves silly.

Ginny in CO said...

K.Joy

Actually I do know what you mean. (Adam probably does too).

The problem is that Obama has raked in a LOT of money. And he's going for a BIG win. Not just swing states. His campaign has been unbelievably on track for a newbie going national for the first time.

Dems are not used to having enough money to fund a fantasy campaign with 700 offices over the 50 states. We are used to having the GOP snatch victories out of thin air.

NOT.THIS.TIME.

When it comes to the economy, Dems are so far ahead of the GOP on budgeting and controlling spending it's hard to believe anyone can believe the idiocy of the CW that they are worse. Sorry I don't have my regular computer with the sources for that.

So, no matter how well you rephrase the GOP talking points to sound sincere and earnest, I'm not buying.

DCM in FL said...

Colin Powell 'endorsed' that miserable crook Sen Stevens by vouching for him in court last week

that makes Powell's judgment & endorsement suspect as far as Obama or Mccain OMHO

bad move General, but I guess loyalty trumps honot once again

ask but don't tell, my arse...

sad that Colin would stoop so low - and for what ??? Ted Stevens belongs in prison !

Sarah Palin can visit him there & learn even more about abuse of power...

Jeremy said...

Probably an outlier, but:

North Dakota poll: Obama 45 - McCain 43 (606 LV; MoE: +/- 4%)

-Among voters who rank the economy as their top concern, 49 percent favor Obama, while 38 percent back McCain. The economy was far and away the most important national issue among voters, according to the poll.

-McCain has failed to solidify his hold on the GOP base in North Dakota, where he has the support of just 73 percent of voters identifying themselves as strong Republicans

http://www.in-forum.com/

Josh said...

New Washington Post-ABC national has:

(Likely Voters)
Obama: 53%
McCain: 43%

(Registered Voters)
Obama: 54%
McCain: 41%

Rachel said...

does anybody have a link to the $100M estimate?

pakaal said...

Here's another another look at McCain's odds:

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z116/pakaal/538latestInvert.png

Quick explanation, as I posted on another entry, I mentioned I've had to keep updating my desktop background. Problem is, the white background wasn't happening for me, so this time after repositioning the charts, I did a simple Photoshop invert, and what happened? Varying shades of human skin tones - light to dark - for Obama, and look! The Republican states are all looking so blue. :-(

s said...

One important note on the 1980 election - Carter's late lead collapsed after the first and only debate a few days later.

prathap said...

I think there is a big october surprise in store! From Mr. Berg in pennsylvania who has filled a criminal lawsuit against BO. I wonder why the BO campaigne just get over with it by producing a birth certificate vault, any idea folks ?

GaMeS said...

He said...
Everyday here in Iraq, when I am not parachuting from my Apache Helicopter into enemy lines, and engaging the terrorists with hand-to-hand combat skills and blowing up their base with my rocket launcher and machine guns, I am giving candy to children and see the love that these Iraqis have for the US Marine Core, our great preisdent, and John McCain.


:: sound of shooting Dr. Pepper out my nose ::


:: sound of choking sobs of laughter as tears of joy, Dr. Pepper, and snot drip all over the desk ::


ROFL!!!!!11!!1!!!eleventyone!!!!


Seriously, that is the funniest shit I've read in a LONG time. =)


Really, the depth and nuance in this satire is delicious:

* "Parachuting" out of his Apache? Better time that well, what with the rotor blades!
* "Enemy lines"? Boy, that would make fighting insurgents easier, if they were all lined up! Then all their "base" would belong to us!
* "Rocket launcher" and "machine GUNS" (plural)? Why stop there, first-person-shooter boy? REAL men also carry a Barrett Light Fifty, a flamethrower, and a chainsaw bayonet!
* And, the finishing touch: The Marine Core. As in, chewy interior. Semper Fudge!


Srsly.

The only thing that makes me sad is that there are some delusional right-wing pricks that actually think like this: "Dammit! If I just had me a rocket launcher, machine guns, and a bow that shoots dynamite-tipped arrows, I'd show them terrorist sumbitches!!! Boot up yer ass, Osama!!!!! ... Oooh, I need me some new boots, too."

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

I see a few people questioning McCain being in PA, IA and CO.
What other options does McCain have other than PA, IA and CO? The demographics are probably good for him. Unfortunately for him, he's on the wrong side of the economy. His only chance to pull this one off is keep at it in PA, IA and CO and hope for a shift in voter sentiment.

Another thought I've been having lately.

Now that we look back, the Joe Biden pick doesn't seem like such a bad pick after all. The initial spin was Biden destroyed his change message. I can't remember the last time I heard that notion to be honest.

Not only was he a good choice in that he brings a serious wealth of knowledge to the White House in International affairs, he connects very very well with older voters, Obama's worst demographic. He's helping out immensely in PA which now, everyone can see, was going to be McCain's primary target this election.

All in all, great choice.

Wa7th said...

:: as PeteKent ::

John McCain will hit his stride on day 61 of the Fundamental Shift towards McCain/Palin - Nov 5th, when he declares his intent to leave the Republican Party to caucus with Hillary, thanking his true friend and American hero Democrat Joseph Lieberman for the inspiration.

DCM in FL said...

link to view the new 10/13 ABC/WaPo poll results O+10 LV

@ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/12/AR2008101202333.html?hpid=topnews

Adam said...

"I wonder why the BO campaigne just get over with it by producing a birth certificate vault, any idea folks ?"

Uh, they did. Reporters have seen the actual birth certificate. Anybody's free to file a lawsuit, and it's not always dismissed instantly even if it's frivolous (there's a similar one going on in NH claiming McCain can't run because of the ambiguous legal status of the Canal Zone in 1926). Try not to get *too* delusional.

Nick Bradley said...

Actually, this would be the biggest comeback ever, since 1980 was a three-way race. John Anderson, the Moderate Republican, was peeling away votes from Reagan all the way until the end, when the Spoiler Effect finally kicked in.

In the end, Reagan simply won over Anderson's supporters

Adam said...

"What other options does McCain have other than PA, IA and CO? The demographics are probably good for him."

It just shows a lack of overall strategy. McCain is down like 13 points in Iowa, and he's anti-ethanol. Any scenario where he'd possibly win there he'd win many other states as well. What's his actual path to victory? Give up Kerry/IA/NM, hold CO, VA, FL, OH, NV and assume the national polls are close enough that NC/IN/MO don't come into play. That's *it*. That's really the only way he can win, unless his PA numbers are way off from what we're seeing. So, any time that's not spent in CO/VA/FL/OH/NV is essentially wasted on his part in terms of actually trying to win. Spending several days in IA this close is like pulling your goalie down 3-0 at the beginning of the second half; a recklessly aggressive strategy that may well lead to you getting blown out.

Yvonne said...

There are some reports in the news that McCain internal polls supposedly show single digit leads of Obama in Iowa, PA and WI. Any thoughts? Are they simply delusional or is there something there?

DCM in FL said...

NICK

an excellent point about the 1980 race

often overlooked

plus the HUGE effect that Reagan's team got by stalling the release of the Iranian embassy hostages until after the election

IF Carter had been allowed to complete the negotiation for their release before Nov 4th, Carter would probably have won re-election

of course that kind of gamesmanship at any cost by the Reagan neo-con team got us Iran/Contra & the Sandanistas & Grenada & Lebanon & eventually all the Bush debacles since he allowed Cheney to reassemble the old neo-con tean again in 2000...

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

Blogger Yvonne said...
"
There are some reports in the news that McCain internal polls supposedly show single digit leads of Obama in Iowa, PA and WI."

That's the first I heard of those "reports."

Adanthar said...

Internal polls *always* wind up friendlier to the campaign than they should. For one reason or another, nobody ever has honest internal polls - there's always a big house effect.

Yvonne said...

There is one from yesterday in the LA times. I will try to find the link.

Adam said...

Yvonne,

Someone just saying what their internals are falls quite low on the credibility scale. Nate's regression has IA +10, PA +12, WI +8, so sure, it's entirely possible that among the internal polls they've taken, some show them down by 7-9 points. I leave it to you to judge whether or not that's something they should be bragging about.

Yvonne said...

Here it is:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-mccain12-2008oct12,0,7364329.story

Haleh said...

More important with Carter is that he was the incumbent, the economy was a mess, and the Iranians were holding American's hostage (with a disastrous rescue). So, his position was sliding due to Reagan hammering on both issues and certainly at that debate.

DCM in FL said...

YVONNE

single digits includes the #'s 6-9 which are all well outside the MOE & make a comfortable lead in the last 3 weeks for any blue or purple state

Nate considers anything over 5% to be of real significance, so no need to sweat if Team Obama 'only' leads by single digits

besides, that is just gamesmanship from a seriously desperate campaign that has no other real options at this point

maybe the GOPers will suspend their campaign again & call for a 'do over'...

alleypang said...

nate...first thing's first. on gallup's tracking graph it looks like carter was up 45-39, not 47-39. maybe there are intermediate points that aren't well-depicted in the graph (which is possible), or maybe harwood has it wrong (which is unlikely).

anyway, i just wanted to rebut kieran's agument about the effect of gallup's non-major party and undecided numbers. in 1980, gallup's poll results went from 47-39-9-5 (carter-reagan-anderson-undecided) to 47-44-8-1 (reagan-carter-anderson-undecided). however, the actual election went 51-41-6-2, meaning that they were within the margin of error of gallup's final poll (kudos to gallup!). because gallup's final poll was that accurate in terms of predictive power, we can confidently dub this final poll as "gospel", and look to the differences between the two gallup polls to see where reagan made his gains. doing this, it's obvious that reagan accomplished his comeback primarily through either undecided or carter voters; anderson dropped only 1%.

in 1968, it was pretty much the same thing. gallup's final poll was nostradamus-like in terms of the actual numbers, and wallace's numbers were unchanged between the penultimate and final polls.

what's the point? based on the 1968 and 1980 gallup estimates and actual election results, you can't simply add anderson+undecided to reach a "14% of the electorate was malleable" number, and you can't simply add wallace+undecided to reach a "20% of the electorate was malleable" number. peeling off third party voters had nothing to do with the comebacks. therefore, the reason why harwood's column is spot on, and favorable to obama, is because, according to gallup, he has a 7-point lead and only 7% of the electorate remains undecided. mccain would have to sway 100% of the undecideds to even tie in the popular vote. all the more reason why his negative ads are political suicide.

Yvonne said...

About Pennsylvania:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20081012_Polls_give_Obama_clear_lead_in_Pa_.html

broberts said...

"I wonder why the BO campaigne just get over with it by producing a birth certificate vault, any idea folks ?"

See it for yourself at http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html High resolution pics as well as a copy of his birth announcement in a local Hawaii paper.

If you are going to troll why don't you do so with something remotely challenging?

liberal_defender_of_freedom said...

thnx

John said...

I think there is a big october surprise in store! From Mr. Berg in pennsylvania who has filled a criminal lawsuit against BO. I wonder why the BO campaigne just get over with it by producing a birth certificate vault, any idea folks ?

First of all, there's no such thing as a "criminal lawsuit". The government brings criminal charges (which individuals can sometimes press), and private citizens bring civil lawsuits.

I'm not an Obama fanatic by any stretch. I'm probably going to vote for him, but only because I dislike him less. But I can say with a good deal of certainty that Berg is a complete crank. In addition to this lawsuit being without any factual merit (hasn't his birth certificate been produced already?), he almost certainly lacks legal standing to bring this kind of claim (though I'll admit that the Supreme Court has never spoken on this issue).

MyCatWearsClothes.com said...

I think Obama's up by at least 12% :) Research2000 seems likely to be the baseline. Then you add in cellphone only voters and new voters and Obama is probably up by about 15%!

Yvonne said...

Well, we can all agree that it is odd for McCain to spend this much time in states where he is behind, instead of trying to hold on to Colorado, Virginia and NC. But maybe they are so convinced that those states stay red no matter what, that it makes sense from their perspective.

Nick Bradley said...

DCM in FL,

I do not think that the hostage issue would have put Carter in the winner's circle -- the economy was the #1 issue (although the economic problems are the time were largely the result of massive government under Ford, Nixon, and LBJ -- Carter and Volker [the Fed Chairman] the were actually trying to fix the problem).

In a 3-way race, it is extremely difficult to predict the outcome. But if Anderson was never running, I think Reagan would have coasted to victory from the start -- although I do think that the split w/ Kennedy hurt Carter.

On a related note, I also do not believe that Clinton would have won in '92 if it weren't for Perot splitting the GOP vote.

Adam said...

Oh, and Nate predicts Obama is "within single digits" in such swing states as Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, and North Dakota. Arizona, South Carolina and South Dakota are 10 behind. Just for some perspective when you realize how horrible a position they're in when they're as far behind in Iowa and Pennsylvania as Obama is in those states.

Joey said...

What other options does McCain have other than PA, IA and CO? The demographics are probably good for him.


OH, VA, NC, FL, NV?

I'll even give him PA, but really? IA and CO?

oct said...

McCain is lying about the Internals in IA. It was a single stop just to appear that McCain has a winning path to 270 like Bush had in 2004. It is a Dream at best.

DCM in FL said...

MYCAT

well enough about what you think

enquiring minds want to know - what does your cat think about the polls ?

dead cat bounce perhaps ???

Oliver said...

It's a funny calculus, which state to campaign in when you're far behind.

I think McCain's most logical choice is to keep campaigning in what used to be the swing states and pray some huge event comes along and changes the race. There's no point in him fighting over North Carolina; if that's the battleground on November 4, he's already lost.

jverhoef said...

Hi folks, this is my first post. I've been lurking for a while, and I've enjoyed the analysis.

To K.Joy
I enjoyed your posts. They are logical, and it's nice to see a different voice here. You've touched on something that I've been thinking about, and to where I disagree with you on internals. I think that McCain is banking on the Bush map of 2004. They have no hope if they have to defend Virgina, Indiana, NC, etc. They are praying (literally) that when the red states vote, when they actually get in the polling booth, they will revert to their republican nature. That is their only hope. Even then, if NH switches, or CO, they are sunk. One of the tight races in 2004 was IA, so again they hope that a little exposure will tip the balance. However, I doubt very much that their internals are different than the pollsters summarized by this site and others. Obama, on the other hand, is playing it safe with a little face time in PA, but the next 4 days in OH. He knows that if he can pick off OH or FL or VA, he wins. These states appear to be in favor of Obama at the moment, but they may be susceptible to a McCain blitz at the end, which is probably what will happen (given McCain doesn't have the money to compete as broadly nor as long as Obama).

And, just to make it clear, I am an Obama supporter. I just prefer rational dbate to name-calling.

Adam said...

"One of the tight races in 2004 was IA, so again they hope that a little exposure will tip the balance."

That's the problem. That appears to literally be their entire decision-making process. That logic is laughable to almost everyone who posts here, and yet someone in his campaign gets paid a lot of money to decide to send him to Iowa.

STepper said...

Obama's September haul is going to be over $125,000,000. He got an additional 1.5 million contributors and his contributors had been averaging about $75 each up to then. (Truly a "people's campaign," just as John McCain would have liked.)

Obama's prior contributors also donated more money.

Why? Sarah Palin was a big reason. And the campaign started to turn dark. And the economy, stupid, helped, too. So, McCain's Palin selection was even more catastrophic than even Bill Kristol could have realized. And now Obama is wallowing in more cash than he can spend. Bill and Hillary smell some of it and are starting to work hard so that Obama will bail her campaign out of debt. It will probably happen.

A couple more points. Ronald Reagan had a disciplined, organized campaign in 1980. He had real professionals. Many of the same people who won him California, and a lot of national pols who came on board. Up to now the McCain campaign appears to have been run by the Three Stooges. (Guess which one Schmidt is.) While Obama is "lucky," don't forget that luck favors the well prepared. And the well organized.

A final thought. A lot of people are complaining that Sarah Palin's Friday travails are not being reported by the MSM. Almost 90% of Americans are following this election closely or very closely. They hunger for news and it's all over the Internets. And they know how to use The Google, too.

At this point I am donating to down ticket senators because I want a filibuster proof, Lieberman free Democratic caucus. I'd suggest others do, too. Especially when the trolls come back. I'm going to give down ticket Senate candidates who really need it $100 a pop every time RWC, PeteKent, He and the other morons come back.

DCM in FL said...

NICK

we will never know

people will tell pollsters that the economy is the #1 issue by rote since they must make a choice of 1 and only 1 'issue'

but back in 1980 the hostage release was always presumed to be on the horizon for a real 'October surprise'

even at that time it was speculated that IF that had occurred, carter gets a last minute BOUNCE & restores the public confidence in him

Reagan/Baker pulled a 'treasonous' or treacherous ploy by convincing the Iranians to delay the release for their personal advantage

IF it had not matterred to the election, then Reagan's team would not have gambled with people'slives to intentionally delay the release date IMHO

GOPers - country first my arse...

oct said...

See if IA was a state that reflected the Lehman bounce then I would say that McCain is right. BUT IA was a lock for Obama early on before Lehman. So the cement has hardened in IA.

McCain only has the BUSH 2000 map to hang his hopes on.