There is a lot of discussion going on about whether the national race is tightening; our model concludes that it is not. But what would meaningful 'tightening' look like in terms of the Electoral College?
Let me be oddly specific here. In order to conclude the Electoral College has tightened to the point where the outcome on November 4 is at least moderately uncertain, I would want to see the following between now and the election. Call it the 2/2/2 condition:
John McCain polling within 2 points in 2 or more non-partisan polls (sorry, Strategic Vision) in at least 2 out of the 3 following states: Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania.
If this condition is met, then I think there could be some drama on Election Night (though by no means would McCain be the favorite). If not, then it's very hard to imagine McCain winning.
10.27.2008
What Would 'Tightening' Look Like?
@ 9:47 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
262 comments
probably not
Can I say "first"?
Me?
Let's say "First Five" and be safe.
Criteria that are extremely unlikely to be met pending some exogenous fluke game-changer are GREAT NEWS!! FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!!
agreed
Drudge can shove that up his ass, seriously. "Tightening?" Pbbbbbbt.
Gobama! :)
DECONSTRUCTING BASIC PHILOSOPHIES OF PARTIES
Disclaimer: I have spent a lot of time breaking down my beliefs down to a few basic core ideas and think I am finally getting close to the core. Feel free to skip this and move on to other ideas if philosophy bores you.
Basic Individual Rights:
1) Freedom ‘To’
2) Freedom ‘From’
3) Freedom ‘Of’
Defining Individual Rights:
1) The freedom ‘To’ is the right that most people think of when hears the term ‘freedom’. This is one’s right of choosing one’s own religion, freedom of speech, freedom to ride across America on a Harley. Is also includes the right to choose your spouse, your vocation, where you live, where to send your kids to school, etc.
2) Freedom ‘From’ refers to protecting you and your property from harm. Most criminal statutes fall under this category. Examples include banning thievery and murder, protecting property rights and one’s own health. This right is apparently so important that even the THREAT of violating this right can result in penalties, by acts such as speeding, drunk driving, or wanton endangerment.
3) Freedom ‘Of’ is one’s freedom of opportunity, regardless of race, class, sex, religion, etc. Most civil rights laws fall in this category. Education being equal and available to all as well. I also believe that this encompasses the belief that if one works and contributes to society, he/she should be allowed to earn a living wage and provide for one’s family. NOTE: This does NOT mean equal outcome, just equal opportunity.
Comparing the philosophies of the two parties, the Republicans tend to put an emphasis on number one. The Democrats tend to weigh each individual case balancing the 3 rights. One side is more ‘cut and dry’ while one is more ‘nuanced’.
For people to have their rights ‘from’ and ‘of’ protected, we need a strong central government enacting and enforcing laws. There is no other way to do it. It would be great in the Republicans’ minds if we could just do away with government and let everyone be what they can be by self-determination. The problem with this is now the power moves to those with the $$$$.
When times are good, this problem is not as evident. The meltdown on Wall Street has recently exposed this problem. Whether they know it or not, the realization of this represents a tectonic shift in the thinking of the role of government. This is why is does not matter what John McCain does, he CANNOT change the circumstances we are now living in.
Capitalism is the most efficient economic system, but works best when there are checks and balances to protect individual rights. Even Alan Greenspan admits that complete free markets cannot police themselves. An economic system is there to work for society's needs, not the other way around.
Fluke game-changing GREAT NEWS!! FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!! is GREAT NEWS!! FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!!
Sounds about right to me. All this Chicken Little-ing about statistical noise in the national polls is pretty annoying.
I sure hope everyone who is concerned is redoubling their efforts for the campaign.
It's all good, but for the win, for the coattails, and for the certainty of what needs to be done: GOTV ++
What about Obama's internal poll that suggests Pennsylvania is a toss-up? Does that cause anyone else some concern?
Oh Nate, you're just being reasonable again. McCain is within 5 points in a couple of national trackers, that obviously means that the race is basically tied. [Ignore those state polls that you see, they don't mean anything.]
Nate:
But you forgot to add "Obama must not be consistently ahead in FL, OH, MO, NC". If he is, then the uncertainty about CO, VA, and PA will amount to little, and Obama could win without 2 of those 3.
I love this website, I even joined the fanclub on Facebook.
It's a shame the media is pretending there's still so much drama, so much uncertainty in this race. Thank good the math over here is unemotional and innocent.
David,
If there is such an internal PA poll it is most likely an outlier. There is just too much data that refutes it.
Ras says that Obama leads McCain in early voting in Colorado by 15% (57-42) however they also add that those who haven't yet voted favor McCain by 11 percentage points. Given that only a fraction of likely voters have cast their votes in Co it sounds like McCain is going to take the state, right? Wrong?
"Anne said...
Drudge can shove that up his ass, seriously. "Tightening?" "
Well no, actually, Drudge CAN'T shove it up his ass, because, you know, it's tightening...
thank you Nate! finally so we can finally stop spending every thread arguing against the concern trolls.
I agree with this formula. It cuts through the clutter of polling and spin and makes sense.
I will say it again... I think the narrative of tightening is good for Obama. It will largely eliminate the complacency that might crop up if everyone agrees he is unstoppable
Nate, I don't understand. You have said that your model includes these two factors:
1) The closer a poll is to the election, the more reliable it is. This tells me the spread in your simulations should be narrowing as Election Day approaches. But it is not narrowing. Why not?
2) The closer we get to Election Day, the more the race should naturally tighten. Yet, the polls have stayed the same. Since the model assumes tightening that is not occurring, shouldn't this also translate into a higher win percentage for Obama every day if the polls don't budge?
On this last point, I seem to recall you claiming at one point that Obama would gain half a win percentage point every day if the polls stayed steady. Now that Obama's up to 96.3%, that daily gain will naturally be smaller, but why does it seem to be 0?
Finally, you've used the term "tigtening" in the context of your model to refer to the race simply getting closer as election day approaches. You seem to have redefined the term here.
Finally finally, any chance that you'd be willing to post the detailed results of your final, Election Day Monte Carlo run for us data analysis types?
John McCain could win every undecided, kegael exercising virgin out there and he would still be very far from the tightness he needs
David:
What about Obama's internal poll that suggests Pennsylvania is a toss-up? Does that cause anyone else some concern?
No, not at all.
1. It was only a rumor; if it actually existed, we do not have any information to compare it against other polls.
2. We have lots of other polls of PA, and it's always a bad idea to be too pessimistic (or too optimistic) based on one poll.
3. It was what, like two weeks ago?
I'm sure it would be easy to find one poll from every battleground state in the past two weeks to be "concerned" about. If you want to be a worrywart, go ahead, but it's not a rational approach to the situation.
"What about Obama's internal poll that suggests Pennsylvania is a toss-up? Does that cause anyone else some concern?"
No.
To give a sense of how strained some of the concern on the Obama side is, I saw some people earlier who were upset by the Rasmussen swing-state numbers. Rasmussen released numbers for 6 states ALL OF WHICH MCCAIN HAS TO WIN. And Rasmussen showed Obama leading in 5 of the 6 and within a point in the 6th. My friends, that is not a close race.
Did everyone see McCain on Meet the Press talking about how the Zogby poll says the race is a close one? I saw that and thought "Huh, 538 says the Zogby polls aren't totally accurate, from what I recall." Thanks 538.com!
I think the only tightening that's going on is the noose tightening around the neck of McShame's chances of winning. In a week, it'll be tightened to death.
What I really want to know is, how are you going to judge the polls after this is over? Who was the best, and who the worst?
I think judging them from around now vs. the actual results is more accurate than doing the day before. Anybody can make up fake numbers now and then suddenly change their Dem/Rep ratio to claim victory at the last minute (like I expect Rasmussen will).
You should report your judging methods ahead of time. Can you do it soon?
Caitlin,
Whenever a poll comes out I check Nate's pollster ratings. This site is AWESOME.
Someone on either Larry King just said that with all this pushing of Obama as socialist and redistributive, that when he wins, it could be seen as a greater mandate for progressive policies, much more than it would have been normally.
So thanks trolls! You are going to help make the country more liberal by your insane attacks!
(Oh, and now that it is an official game, what if the rain and cold mean Game 5 can't be continued, and it has to be called, and thus, the Phillies win the World Series? I assume they'd never do that, but still it adds a bit of tension to any forthcoming rain delay).
Dunno what this says, but i live in a fairly wealthy suburban neighborhood and Ive seen 3 Obama yard signs compared to 0 for McCain.
so let me get this straight. Rass polled Colorado on the day Obama got 50K people out of their homes for 2 rallies? ha ha ha no wonder the spread is so tight there!
"Ras says that Obama leads McCain in early voting in Colorado by 15% (57-42) however they also add that those who haven't yet voted favor McCain by 11 percentage points. Given that only a fraction of likely voters have cast their votes in Co it sounds like McCain is going to take the state, right? Wrong?"
Wrong. It's theoretically possible that McCain could still win Colorado, but Obama led in the Colorado poll that Rasmussen released today 50-46.
Although I'm having trouble seeing how Obama +15 early v. McCain +11 late combine to an Obama +4. That would actually work out to 75% early voters, which seems on the high side to me.
Who voted early vs who waits until Nov 4 means nothing. Counting votes does not begin until after the polls are closed on the 4th, even in Colorado.
I still feel somewhat worried though. I feel it would be better if Obama was doing GREAT in a few battleground states rather than well in all of them
Tanya Acker, democractic strategist, was just on Larry King slamming Zogby's polling.
sorry that should read 150k people in CO.
lat,
In a state of nearly 5 million 100k or so is not going to make a huge difference. Though clearly more Obama supporters were out of the house than McCain supporters
As a public service, let me please say DO NOT RESPOND TO POSTS FROM "Right Wing Conspiricist", and other trolls looking to get into arguments. It ruins the constructive dialog that normally takes place here.
In fact, I think it should now be the duty of the person who says "FIRST" at the top of each post to include the above disclaimer.
StrategicVision is partisan? How partisan? I'd love to know who to believe when it comes to OH and GA - StrategicVision and InsiderAdvantage could be equally wrong, or one could be miles off and the other could be dead right...
If he was doing great in them, then they would no longer be battlegrounds, would they?
Drudge is reporting that Zogby will be 49-45 for Obama.
thanks Matt W.
Anyone know what is coming out tomorrow in terms of polls either national and state?
@tripwire
I agree, but Obama is doing great in some former battlegrounds - so they are no longer considered battlegrounds (Michigan, Iowa). I don't think Pennsylvania is a battleground either.
Obama needs to win 1 of half a dozen states, and he's ahead in all of them. I'll take it!
@imadis:
Excellent post.
I would suggest the following freedoms: the freedom from and the freedom to.
According to most philosophers of the Enlightenment (including Locke and Montesquieu), the only freedom that makes sense is the freedom from. The freedom to encourages encroachments on others freedom from. It is unstable and will quickly devolve into lawlessness.
Only the freedom from respects the individual. Only the freedom from creates a conservative (and stable) state. Only the freedom from is a true freedom. Freedom to is a license to do anything you want. It is anarchy. It is the prelude to a tyrannical state (through the swinging pendulum).
Neither party in the United States really understands the freedom from. Both seem to be pushing the freedom to.
thene,
Believe Nate, believe the model!
"I still feel somewhat worried though. I feel it would be better if Obama was doing GREAT in a few battleground states rather than well in all of them"
Define "GREAT". Obama's leading in Virginia by 7.2 and in Colorado by 6.6. Nate gives him a 96% chance of winning VA and a 95% chance of winning CO. If he wins either one, he's the next President of the United States.
imadis,
Libertarians, not Republicans, should be considered the party of "freedom to." After all, Republicans are certainly not the party of "freedom to have sex with whomever one wants without government intrusion," "freedom to procure an abortion, even in cases of medical necessity," or "freedom to have unmonitored phone conversations."
Also, there is a great deal of overlap between the three catgories. Couldn't "freedom to" as a concept be rephrased in many cases as "freedom from government intrusion?"
Something is wrong in the last Rasmussen poll in NC.
Obama is leaning among independents (unaffiliated) by 20 points. And McCain wins by 1.
No way.
MaritimePole said...
Ras says that Obama leads McCain in early voting in Colorado by 15% (57-42) however they also add that those who haven't yet voted favor McCain by 11 percentage points. Given that only a fraction of likely voters have cast their votes in Co it sounds like McCain is going to take the state, right? Wrong?
^
Sounds about right to me! That's why polls don't elect people votes do!
lat,
actually I was thinking about it and 150k is about 3% of the state's population, so depending on when the calls were made that could have made a difference.
A RNC pac has a loathsome ad running in Tampa. Shows 9/11 guys, burning buildings, and then talks about terrorists obtaining driver licenses.
thanks, nate. great information!
and, i don't just want to be a fan, i want to be a friend (on facebook). my husband is totally jealous of you. :)
I saw that on Drudge, too. How does he get such an early "heads up" on the Zogby numbers. Tell me there's not something fishy about that.
Has anyone figured out how early voting will affect the results of exit polls on election day? If we assume that early voting has been favoring the democrats then won't exit polling skew toward the republican candidates?
I guess we will have to wait for the actual vote totals for each race to determine who the winner is. It will be a nail biting night.
Matt W - the problem with StrategicVision is that even though its pollster rating in the model is moderate, its large surveys give it a lot of weight in the model. Look at GA in the sidebar and you'll see what I mean. With a 'partisan' firm adding a strongly-weighted M+6 there...I guess it's just wishful thinking, but I'd like to call GA not so safe as it looks in the model.
@Matt W
150k, 3%, but it could be a higher proportion of the voting pop depending on how many under 18's went to the events.
Dario,
What is the party ID ratio in NC? Do Rs have a significant advantage?
I'm wondering if the "tightening" effect often seen in elections and that Nate has built into his predictions (currently he's estimating 1.3% tightening in the last 8 days) is actually just the tendency for statistical fluctuations to return to the norm.
If so, the questions is, where's the norm this year? Averaged over many year's clearly it's at 50:50, where Nate's assuming it will be, but given the strength of anti-incumbent feeling (and little statistics like the consistent 90:10 against on the question of whether America's on the right track), this year I think it's clear that the "norm" the polls are fluctuating around isn't going to be 50:50. In fact, if you look at Nate's Super Tracker, there's a clear upward trend (presumably as people get more and more comfortable with Obama). Indeed, if you're willing to ignore the late summer "silly season" and the period of and just after the two national conventions (i.e. August and September) then the upward trend has been pretty clear, going from O -2 at the beginning of the year to O +7 or so now, with deviations around it of only about +/- 1.5% (outside Aug/Sept). On that basis I'd suggest a Nov 4th figure in the O +5.5 to O +8.5 region: somewhere from a solid win to a landslide, with the lost likely figure around O +7, which is about 375 EV.
Let's get a breakout of the last weeks election in its own super tracker so we can see where the momentum is taking us in the last week.
"I guess we will have to wait for the actual vote totals for each race to determine who the winner is. It will be a nail biting night."
After Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004, I can't believe that anybody would have planned to rely on exit polls to determine winners anyway.
There have been a lot of comments about what one side or the other's internal polls must be telling them. How good do you think those internal polls can be, really? I have a hard time imagining that they could be getting better information from their own pollsters than what we get at sites like this one, except maybe if they poll in a few states that the major pollsters don't do often enough.
I don´t know Matt.
thene,
Yes, but it has a republican lean that Nate takes out behind the scenes.
dawolf,
Yes I agree about 3%, see my second post to lat. Though it depends entirely on when exactly the calls were placed. Going to a rally does not mean you are out the whole day!
Colorado
"Among those who have already voted, 57% back Obama compared to 42% for McCain. The Republican has an 11-point lead among those who have not yet voted."
Looks like CO is going to stay in the republican column this year.
Yes, but what does this all mean for Joe the Plumber? Will he have to pay his taxes?
quadrivium,
The thing about internal polls is that they often probe deeper about the strength of support and what messages will swing support. So in PA there may be a lot of soft support that will respond to specific messages. That makes the campaigns want to spend time there driving those messages
Blogger Quadrivium said...
There have been a lot of comments about what one side or the other's internal polls must be telling them. How good do you think those internal polls can be, really? I have a hard time imagining that they could be getting better information from their own pollsters than what we get at sites like this one, except maybe if they poll in a few states that the major pollsters don't do often enough.
The pollsters talk to a few hundred people over a couple of days.
From Sean's posts, you can tell that at least the Obama campaign talks to that many people in an hour. And they're doing it hour after hour, day after day.
Who has access to the most data?
What about Zogby and TIPP? Both those pollsters could easily show McCain within 2 considering their suspect methodologies.
The Wild Card in Iranian Relations
Ba Humbug. We'll pay for this.
""Among those who have already voted, 57% back Obama compared to 42% for McCain. The Republican has an 11-point lead among those who have not yet voted."
Looks like CO is going to stay in the republican column this year."
Again, Rasmussen is taking those numbers from the internals of a poll that shows Obama leading by 4 points, 50-46. Now, that said, those numbers don't really make sense put together unless 75% of Colorado voters really have voted already. But since the 50-46 topline is the money number, I would assume that any problems with inconsistent internals are problems with the internals, not with the top number.
People,
Ras obviously combined the two populations (early and late voters)to arrive at his top line results for CO and he has it BLUE.
Plus as lat pointed out at least 3% of the state's population attended an Obama rally on the day the poll was in the field.
3% by the way is an amazing number!
Going to a rally does not mean you are out the whole day!
Um, let me tell you something. Going to an Obama rally, like last Sunday in Colorado, does in fact mean you are out pretty much the whole day. I went to see him Sunday in Fort Collins, CO, and he was only about 2 miles from my house. We were gone for almost 7 hours, including time spent in the security line, and then heading home.
I can only imagine how long people were out who came much further than we did. And ours was the 'small' rally, with only 50,000 people!
@Caitlin
That poll was supposed to be a Zogby poll released on Sunday in Iowa, which had Obama +3.
However, we haven't seen a Zogby poll in Iowa for over a week (and nobody has Iowa only at 3).
Chances are it was one of those partial (1 day) polls that drudge is so famous for leaking, which means it probably only had something like 200 people, +/- 15 MOE. If that is the case, we should see the full poll in the next two days.
Either that, or McCain had the wrong state, or McCain was full of (word deleted by poster).
redhawks,
Nate is talking about STATE polls not national polls
I'm surprised nobody is talking about this...McCain CAN'T close the deal.
He hasn't hit 50% AT ALL! I don't even think he ever hit 49%! Those percentages are the minimum Obama is getting at the moment. McCain has continued to hover in the 43-46% zone ALL election. It is not possible for him to win.
Thanks, Matt W and Badgerhair. Good points.
What people perceive as the Republican emphasis and what they naturally are not the same thing in regards to individual rights.
Americans want to see themselves as rugged, self-determined individuals. These are the same folks who tend to vote Repub. Rural people tend to see themselves more in this way and tend to vote Repub. When you think about it, their actions are less likely to affect their neighbor than the same actions of a city-dweller.
City dwellers tend to see the actions of the neighbors as affecting them more, thus a greater desire to protect their own right 'from' harm as the predominant right.
This is also why minorities tend to vote Dem whether they are pro-life or not. They are not under the false illusion that we can do whatever we want and become whatever we want without the protection of a central government.
The economic meltdown has now drawn back the curtain to reveal that we ALL need some form of government to protect our basic rights. Having a minimal government cedes power to those with the $$$.
Nate, Can you show us your curve for your expected historical tightening. I'd like to know if as things tighten, they are what you expect, or if they are more or less that the historical model. Kinda like you did for the conventions. It helped to understand how the polls were comparing to your expected curve.
Vinny said...
I'm surprised nobody is talking about this...McCain CAN'T close the deal.
^
McCain is from the party in power, when all the shit hit the fan and is only single digits away from the supposed "change" candidate. So no Obama hasn't closed the deal! With all the perceived flaws of Bush, certainly Obama should be running way ahead, but he isn't!
Don't underestimate the American electorate's appetite for retard sandwiches. I'm seeing evidence of that in the national polls and Missouri, in particular.
joyncassie,
I second that request! I would also like to know if the trend and projection curves are going to come into agreement by 11/3.
Eric said...
The point with this whole budget thing is Obama and company will sit down do the math and make hard decisions. The budget will be balanced or close to it. McCain finished almost last in his class for good reason. It's not just that he liked to party and didn't care. That'll get you a 2.0-2.5 GPA. In order ot finish close to dead last out of 858 students, you can't be too bright. He'll either cut all spending with a hatchet or continue huge deficits. He really doesn't get it. It's not just a line the Dems were using.
"What is the party ID ratio in NC? Do Rs have a significant advantage?
No. In fact, the Dems have a pretty big advantage in NC. A Pew poll in March 2008 had Democrats at 36 percent to 29 percent for the GOP. The official numbers are even starker. The 2008 numbers have Dems with 55.1%, Repubs with 27.7%, and neither at 17.2%. A lot of those Dems are likely more conservative, of course. Still, it seems dubious that Obama could have a strong lead among independents and still trail.
eric,
The budget won't get balanced (in the short term) and shouldn't get balanced (again in the short term). We are in a recession, and that is an absolutely terrible time to try to cut a 500 billion dollar deficit into 0.
sedi,
Yeah, unless Rs have a huge advantage then it is dubious.
Thanks for bringing this up, Nate. It's really easy for ordinary statistical drift (i.e. within the margin of error) to look like an impending disaster, at least to those of us who have been conditioned to be a little jumpy about this stuff. (A couple of close-but-not-quite elections will do that to you.)
p.s. Have a bag of funny.
The second set of numbers for NC in my last post might be early voting numbers rather than overall party ID.
What happened to the delete comment function? I am not getting the little trash can icon anymore. Does everyone else have this problem as well?
I must say I think election night will be very exciting even if I'm totally sure Obama will win (if he's up by 10+ in the pollster average on election eve) because a part of me is so skeptical because of '00 & '04... It's like I have to see it to believe it sort of thing. I think a lot of Dems have that feeling which is why I'm not too worried about complacency with voting. Along with the great enthusiasm for Obama.
I'm very interested to see how Obama does in all of the states, even if they aren't needed for victory. I'm also of course curious to see how things go in the Senate & in the House.
As long as there aren't too many dirty tricks from the GOP things should be alright.
I've mentioned here before - I think there's a great chance that Obama will greatly outperform the polls because of a combination of all of the new voters, a huge GOTV effort, reverse Bradley, and the cellphone effect. I'm hopeful that the turnout will be totally unprecedented. I'm talking about just totally flooring people. Turnout was 55% in 2004. What if it's 65% in 2008? I imagine that Obama would win by huge landslide margins in such a scenario. I hope it happens.
sedi,
Yes, when they added the word verification they did away with the delete comment power. Though somebody occasionally deletes comments for you. BB is watching!
Josh,
Nate's numbers are WAY better than the pollster average... WAY BETTER!
The only way to close the deal is
to win the election. Anything short
of that from either candidate is
'Not a Deal Closer'
First Tuesday after the first Monday in November of an even year
every four years. Who ever has the
most Electoral College Votes at the
end of that day closes the deal.
Sceptics, go take a chill pill or
whatever the correct phrase is.
Matt W said...
eric,
The budget won't get balanced (in the short term) and shouldn't get balanced (again in the short term). We are in a recession, and that is an absolutely terrible time to try to cut a 500 billion dollar deficit into 0.
Understood and agreed. i'm simply pointing out the flaw in the argument that says Obama won't give the tax breaks he promises because he can't balance the budget that way and do the things he wants to do. It's a ridiculous argument to make when McCain wants to spend more than Obama and cut more taxes for the wealthy.
"Rasmussen Markets data gives Obama a 87.8 % chance of carrying Colorado on Election Day. At the time this poll was released, Colorado is rated “Leans Democrat” in the Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator."
in 2004 about 2,000,000 people voted in colorado, so, assuming that a large majority of the people going to a rally are likely voters, they account for something around 6-7% of the votes, or a couple of % points on the poll
I've asked this a few times but have not seen an answer. How is exit polling compensating for early voting? There seem to be an overwhelming number of Obama voters taking advantage of early voting in states like NC, FL and GA. Won't that skew the exit polling numbers on Nov. 4 in favor of McCain?
"Though somebody occasionally deletes comments for you."
Really? Wow, there was a time when Mule Rider was not only regularly calling Nate a wanker, but he also intentionally hijacked posts by senselessly filling up the comments -- and he was never disciplined or warned. If there is actually a moderator now that would really be something.
Thanks for the info, Eric. I guess I've gotten too busy to keep such close track of the comments sections these days.
Is there a degree program in college
for a Political Pundit? How does
one get to be a Political Pundit?
Or is this a position that you get
through discovery like actors who
are discovered.
Eric,
It is a flawed argument but we can refute it with better arguments! The main thing the Gov needs to do now is to stimulate the economy through appropriate tax cuts and spending. Deficits will be OK if we look like we might raise taxes later.
Eric,
Factcheck has Obamas deficit in 2013 @ $281B, and McCain @ $662B, on a $1.1T budget. If McCain thinks he can cut the budget by a third, that's not a hatchet, that's a chainsaw!
Sedi said...
Thanks for the info, Eric. I guess I've gotten too busy to keep such close track of the comments sections these days
I get no love :(
All of my (few) posts have had the little trash can and I began posting after word verification. I have used my trash can once.
FOX Propaganda Network and the local wingnut media try it on with Bill Burton and Joe Biden
www.jedreport.com/2008/10/bill-burton-isnt-taking-any-bu.html
www.jedreport.com/2008/10/barbara-wests-audition-reel-fo.html
No wonder these corrupt arseholes are on ths Obama campaign shitlist.
bobnsj,
REALLY! hmmm.
http://www.pollingreport.com/2004.htm#Pollster
2004 polling data for the last week of the 2004 election. Shows Bush with a "healthy" 2.3% advantage on John Kerrry in the polls. There will not be a 7% (roughly Obama's lead average) swing in one week. Just as the polls could/would not have swung 2.3% Kerry's way. The lead in the actual election is mirrored pretty closely with the average lead for bush.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-sinker/why-2008-is-not-2004-redu_b_138232.html
better explanation of all this
Looking at the tightening national polls, keep in mind that a lot of them are getting closer and closer to a 100% total. There's apparently fewer undecideds, and a lot less room for McCain to gain ground. Maybe I'm wrong, but a few weeks ago a lot of those polls were totalling around 90-92%.
no trashcan icon on my 'polised' posts
For the 2/2/2 rule: Does Zogby Interactive count? After all, it's a non-partisan pollster....
"I've asked this a few times but have not seen an answer. How is exit polling compensating for early voting? There seem to be an overwhelming number of Obama voters taking advantage of early voting in states like NC, FL and GA. Won't that skew the exit polling numbers on Nov. 4 in favor of McCain?"
That is a really great point. I've actually thought about that as well. It does seem like Obama's supporters are taking advantage of the early vote more so than McCain's (by a pretty wide margin) so that should bias the exit polls in McCain's favor. It would *seem* that the exit pollsters/media are smart enough to take this into consideration on election night. But if they aren't it could make for some very situations election night... Imagine they have exit polling saying McCain won Georgia 52 to 42 but Obama actually won 48 to 47. I think the networks will be slow to call anyway... OK THERE. I have gone insane. I'll stop now.
For those Obama supporters worried -
tonight on Anderson Cooper 360 David Gergen said that Sarah Palin and her clothes are still being discussed shows how bad off the McCain campaign is (discussed because of the internal fighting).
Does anyone anywhere think that for the next seven days it is all of a sudden going to become an error free, flawless campaign? And it would need to be for McCain to have any chance of winning.
It is more likely that the bickering and behind the scenes nastiness is going to continue - and in no small part because the Romney aides now part of the campaign are aiming at destroying Palin, and frankly prefer McCain not win.
Keep your popcorn popper ready to go...
In 1993 when the Liberal party took power in Canada from the Progressive Conservatives they started a 6 billion dollar infrastructure programme. This included roads, bridges and things such as local hockey arenas (it is Canada after all...). This was done in concert with the provinces and some municipalities. It helped us go from having a rather moribund economy to having a growing stable economy pretty quickly. Might be something to consider.
I don't see any glaring inconsistency w/ the CO Rasmussen numbers (57% of early voters back Obama, McCain has 11% lead in yet to vote, Obama leading overall 50-46). Assume McCain leads 55-44 in yet to vote:
.57*% early + .44*(1-% early) = .50
implies ~46% have already voted. A bit high, but GMU estimates 38%, so perhaps true...
Sonora,
It seems like only 1 or 2% of the undecideds have decided so far. I think these people are just hungry for attention or something. True undecideds are hard to imagine. The support for each has noticeably strengthened too. That is at least as important as these damn undecideds
sonora you are right. McCain does appear to be taking from the undecided pile (more so than from Obama's) and Obama is picking up from there as well (he's at his highest #s yet in pollster avg) so in reality even if the margin is closing a tiny bit - it may actually be Obama in even better position in that he's "tied up" more voters closing in on 50+ (which is of course, unbeatable.) WHAT THE HECK?! This man is crazy!
Barack Obama wins every state won by John Kerry. His narrowest margins in the 04 Blue states are in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire.
Obama also wins, in declining order of margin of victory: Iowa, New Mexico, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri.
Ohio and North Carolina are extremely tight wins, but the closest race of the night is Missouri, which Obama wins by less than 2000 votes. The narrowest win for McCain is Indiana, which is only slightly wider than the Missouri result. The other narrow wins for McCain are North Dakota, Montana, and Georgia. Arizona and Alaska also end up being close, the latter because Pacific time zone voters know Obama is President-elect before voting ends. The electoral vote margin is 364 Obama, 174 McCain.
Obama wins the popular vote 53-47, one point better than Bush in 2004.
Democrats lose three seats in the House and pick up 23, for a net gain of 20. Among these is Iowa’s Fourth Congressional district. Democrats pick up the following Senate seats: Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Oregon, North Carolina, Minnesota, and Alaska. The Georgia Senate race goes to a runoff. Mary Landrieu wins an extremely narrow re-election victory. Including Lieberman, the Democrats end one shy of 60 votes in the Senate, pending the results of the Georgia runoff.
"I've asked this a few times but have not seen an answer. How is exit polling compensating for early voting?"
Any chance the outfit the conducts all the exit polling for the networks is calling people who have voted early. Their names should be available just as polling stations post lists of who has voted during the day on election day.
How is exit polling compensating for early voting?
I think Chuck Todd was asked this -- one of the number-crunchers, anyway. They factor in the early voting numbers and their polling of early voters (remember, most EV states have very detailed public stats on who has voted early). So yeah, they're aware that the EV and election-day voter populations are different.
The networks all say that they will have separate polling to cover early voters.
The exit polls, and I imagine the early vote polling, are handled by one group that works for all the networks. Then each network gets the data, and analyzes it themselves.
Some networks isolate the people who make the calls from hearing what has been called elsewhere, which is a good idea.
^ Just my prediction....
"I get no love :("
Aw, crap, sorry about that Matt W. I totally misread who that post was from. I really do appreciate the help, as it seems like an odd and silly decision to get rid of the delete comment function. For example, right now I wish that I could delete my previous comment thanking Eric instead of you...not that I have anything against Eric, mind you...aw, crap, I'd better just give up while I'm behind. Sorry, again.
It's a darn good thing that I'm not running for office.
Re Exit Polls and early votes...
Don't you think that the exit polls know as much about the early vote as you do? They will make the appropriate adjustments, but exit polls are flawed anyways. Pay attention to actual returns with a small mix of exit polls and pay attention to where (county by county) the returns are coming in from.
Overall, I think they have a good plan to get the best exit poll numbers possible.
So i live in Vancouver, Wa, across the river from Portland, OR. I just saw a TV commercial during Monday Night Football attacking senate candidate Dave Brownlow for being "too liberal" and wanting to "abolish prisons." Who is Dave Brownlow? He is the Constitution Party candidate for senate. Who paid for the ad? GORDON SMITH! The Pubs are running commercials against the crazy right-wingers by calling them too liberal! Ha!
I'm just thrilled that the Mc staffers and GOP TH are taking turn pitching scores of bodies under buses.
This is a fantastic bit of snark in which an unnamed staffer is hung out to dry then named and flung:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIKklsFo0uE
Of course, she then had to respond and on it goes. Air time and message cluttering with one week to go. Fantastic . . .
@ sedi
ROTFL
Keep your popcorn popper ready to go...
Thinking of the scene at the end of "Over the Hedge" Imy son's favorite movie) where the group is sitting on the hedge, watching the guy, gal, and bear get taken down by their own plans.
Please make sure you and your friends and family are voting!!! I am going tomorrow or Wednesday and have taken a couple of hours off to do so.
I personally find it hard to walk away from this site especially on a great day like today with like what 5 posts (unless I didn't pay attn to time)..but you HAVE to go and vote
Don't talk about it. Be about it. If you hope he wins or want him to win. Vote for him. Without your vote, all this will be crap. He will lose.
Would those criteria define a tightening race, or merely a "tight" one?
I think tightening would be better operationally defined as a statistically significant downward trend in the margin between Obama and McCain's win percentages, as calculated by this site's model. By that definition, the race could tighten, but without ever reaching the point where it's actually tight.
The race is tightening...in that the noose is tightening around the McCain's campaign neck.
for all the concerned,
in the las month, obama's number as varied between 49 and 52; mccain between 42 and 45.
the gap has been pretty much unchanged, with a total decrease of the undecideds that has driven both numbers slightly up.
there is NO tightening in the polls, if you look at the trend curves in the last two weeks they are almost perfectly parallel
david,
Tightening is defined by the polls showing a smaller gap between the candidates. Since Nate accounts for some tightening the win percentage numbers on this site will not change as a result of tightening in the polls.
Why can't Obama close the deal? He's running against George Bush's policies so what's the problem?
"For the 2/2/2 rule: Does Zogby Interactive count? After all, it's a non-partisan pollster...."
Yeah, sure. And by that criterion, the Nickelodeon poll would also count. Actually, the Nickelodeon poll is probably a bit more trustworthy than Zogby Interactive.
Zogby has really undermined his already weak reputation as a pollster by doing the interactive stuff. It might eventually be decent, but it is beyond horrible as of now. When I looked at the Zogby state polls today I almost instinctively disregarded them, until I realized that they might not be the interactive ones.
Here's a weird anecdotal trend. For many weeks now, I've been entering call and canvass data in OH for the local O campaign. There has recently been a noticeable spike in people voting for third party candidates. Seriously, like I had entered one or two in thousands before. Now it's probably about 5% of those who respond . . .
Badgerhair said...
Blogger Quadrivium said...
.
.
.
The pollsters talk to a few hundred people over a couple of days.
From Sean's posts, you can tell that at least the Obama campaign talks to that many people in an hour. And they're doing it hour after hour, day after day.
Who has access to the most data?
The location in my current town probably talks to a couple hundred people an hour. And it's not all that big a town. Obama's got information on almost every single registered voter in the country about now, if you include hangups as 'information'. We're not talking random sample, we're talking complete set. And McCain's got it for all of the competitive states, I'm sure.
This not only means that the complete information can be used, but it also can be used for internal polling as well. Say you sample 200 people in Ohio. You discover that 100 of them are Democrats. Then you go over your data, and find that of the people who answered calls, only 40% of them were Democrats as of last June. You know to adjust the numbers.
The outside pollsters make wild-assed guesses as to how to adjust. The insiders have much more accurate information.
Datamar poll - FL
O: 49
M: 44
Same spread as their last poll, with fewer undecideds.
In late night confessions: my son is now officially brainwashed. When he sees McCain on TV he chants: liar liar pants on fire. When he sees Palin he says: There is the wolf shooter!
He is 7 years old.
bradley,
what makes you think that obama can't close the deal?
he has been polling at >50% for two weeks, with an overwhelming majority of EV.
what does it take to 'close the deal' in your eyes?
Has anybody in history ever asked why the candidate behind in the polls can't "close the deal?"
In the vast universe of stupid political commentary, this phrase is the nadir.
newsinoh,
Do you think that is a result of who is getting called and canvassed at this stage of the game? It goes against the CW because most of the time 3rd party supporters end up voting for a D or an R.
Bradley Effect said...
Why can't Obama close the deal? He's running against George Bush's policies so what's the problem?
Want my definition of closing the deal?
Right now, time will hurt McCain- if the polls stay the same, then McCain will lose about .5% a day and Obama will gain the same amount.
So if the polls simply remain constant, by this model Obama has a 100.7% of winning by doing nothing.
That isn't closing the deal. That is closing, signing, sealing, and delivering the deal.
THIS
IS
A
DEAD
PARROT
Unlike you, who is apparently still a live parrot (of Republican garbage).
don't panic,
he is trolling. Ignore him.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS
Is Datamar a decent pollster? I don't think RCP even references them (as I couldn't find a previous poll on RCP.
@Bradley Effect....Why can't Obama close the deal? He's running against George Bush's policies so what's the problem
Because it's not November 4th, 2008.
The deal closing only happens on
election day.
Go 'O'
Do not talk to:
Right Wing Conspiricist
Bradley Effect
@ matthew H
Not to pick on you personally, but a lot of people ask questions that are already answered in Nate's FAQ. If you read his discussion of how he generated his current pollster ratings, you can see how he's likely to do it again this year - after the election.
Come on people, don't be so frigging lazy - a lot of the questions you are asking have already been answered.
yvonne,
your son watches too much TV! ;)
panic--If Obama is running against a 3rd Bush term, which is percieved as a bad thing, why is McCain only down in single digits? He should be so far ahead that the race isn't in question. Right now, Obama's victory totally hinges on unprecedented amount of democratic turnout, but should the vote not exceed expectation he's sunk! That is why he hasn't closed the deal.
tibor - To be honest I really don't know whether they are reputable or not. They are assigned a decent weight by Nate and did a fair amount of polling during the primary season. The only two polls I've seen from them in the general election have bee the two recent FL surveys.
Never underestimate the power of the dark side of the force.
I wanted to add that my kids had election day at their elementary school today. I am in Orlando, FL (I changed my blog name finally!). Both my kids voted for Barack Obama they are 10 and 5. My older son said that one girl in her class was voting for McCain and she got a little picked on. Poor lil girl for her parent's possible decisions. But hopefully will reflect our outcome.
My word verification: stlen, damn it better not!!!!
newsinoh,
Might it be because you are down to the still undecideds?
I would think most people go with a third-party when they finally decided that they won't vote for one of the two major party candidates.
I don't know enough about your process to give an educated guess, but I suspect there is an explanation if it is not 'sampling error.'
@kemlab101
You mis-spelled farce.
I wonder if Obama promised blacks, reparations in exchange for votes? Michelle Malkin said that was a real possibility. I hope they don't riot Nov. 5th!
I know I will be flamed for being "racist," but these are legitimate concerns.
The RNC is buying ad time in...
MONTANA
Frigging MONTANA
50 State Strategy!!
It was 27-4 in my son's second grade class. They drew pictures, and there were a lot of peach faced Obama's. Don't know if that means anything or not.
verification: John McCain will be "inable" to win the election
matt w,
I'm not sure what is causing the spike in third party voter contacts. I can usually tell what subset they're targeting on the list and this appears no different from past lists. There are fewer undecideds as well so, perhaps, the undecideds were Rep-leaners who just can't do it this year? Maybe since they figure the election is lost they'll make a statement by supporting a third party?
Bradley Effect wins the Idiot Troll of the Day award.
rikyrah,
Yes, they bought 1000 points !!! They must be scared! Though I imagine advertising in MT isn't that expensive, but 1000 points is a LOT.
Too bad (for them) that they don't have any convincing messages to advertise!
newsinOH,
The last week of a campaign is like walking through treacle. You're down to scraping the barrel of the permanently outs and the only-vaguely-persuadables, the hardest sells in the book. It can get quite dispiriting compared to a month ago when you were just notching up easy definites. Just think how many definites you've got already.
Being born and raised in CO and living there during this election, I thought I would offer up a little insight that would steer polls like the Rock Mountain News to put Obama up by +11 points. The majority of Colorado's population is centered in Urban areas, all of which have increased since 2004. The Republican Party took a HUGE hit in the last few years over the enlargement of a certain Military Base in Souther CO that would take much needed pasture land away from ranchers. In my small community in Trinidad this caused a massive uprising against many of our state representatives to put a stop to. In fact an open letter to President Bush was sent from a group of Colorado Ranchers that heavily supported him in 2000-2004. So far the only person to help save this land has been the hugely popular Gov. Ritter(D) of CO who one in a landslide victory in 2006.
Politics in Colorado can be summed up in just a few major topics.
1)Water
2)Land
3)Pollution/Environment
4)Denver
Denver itself is seperate just because of its status as the population center of Colorado and many of the out lying cities, Colorado Springs for instance, view it as almost a different country that has direct influence over their youth. The adage "If its done in Denver" comes up a lot during election season. yes taxes should be in there too possibly.
Colorado is a very progressive state which to be totally honest feels energized by both the McCain and Obama campaigns. However, you will find that Obama has spoken more to the point of what really concerns the people of the Mile High State, and I think that will really play out in the polls.
P.S. If you EVER meet a person who claims to be from Colorado that isn't concerned with one of the above topics then they weren't born in the 303.
bradley,
you are right, if people were voting in a rational way, this would not be close and obama would be ahead by 20-30 points.
but by any reasonable metric he has 'closed the deal' anyway, because his position is virtually unassailable by mccain barred major frauds or some exceptional extra-electoral event
Re the Pennsylvania internal from 2 weeks ago that may or may not exist-
Yeah, well I read that Senator Rockefeller has an internal with Obama up 1 in West Virginia- his staff was so nice as to leak it to a Washington Post columnist discussing Obama's slim chance there. If an internal hits the press its because its in someone's interest that this be made public. And judging by the antsy nervousness of people over it long after it was taken, it was meant to be a kick in the pants don't be complacent message. It doesn't even have to be true to have the effect needed.
I am a litlle worried/curious over the poor results on Sunday over several pollsters in natinal tracking but not going to take them as gospel til they are corroborated across tommorrows polls. And even with the +3's coming out McCain has yet to lead in forever -since Battleground changed their methodology to sane? And the important tipping point states haven't been kind to McCain.
Actually we all saw what tightening looked like in the mid September. McCain had an average lead within the margin or error and a couple individual poll leads outside the margin of error in the national polls. The state polls gave McCain small leads in states like OH and FL a couple outside the margin of error and the occasional poll had McCain leading CO and VA. Nothing like that is remotely occurring now and Obama's base line in the national polls was 48-49 before the McCain bump back then but Obama's base line is 50-51 now based on RCP averages.
If McCain does not erode that top number to below 49 it won't be close.
I hope we use the outcome and these numbers for future polling data
@bradley effect
A more interesting question is why, after 6 months and half a billion dollars in negative advertising being directed against him, after being constantly accused of everything from a neophyte thru being Bush's brother to being an un American communist, socialist, Muslim, terrorist is Obama > 50% nationally?
Datamar used to poll in California, and they produced some
silly results. Maybe with the move to Florida, they've gotten better.
yvonne,
Story about a friend. When he was just a toddler his parents were county precinct chairs for the Adlai Stevenson campaign. One bedtime he pretended to read his storybook to his mother. He ended his "reading" by declaring that baby Jesus voted for Stevenson. His mom laughed and said baby Jesus did not vote for Stevenson whereupon the toddler angrily demanded to know who it was baby Jesus did vote for.
:)
@Bradley Effect:
Why cannot Obama close the deal?
'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!
He's closed the deal (in a week).
Matt said...
Bradley Effect wins the Idiot Troll of the Day award.
The last few days it was "Mule Rider". (not the original one).
The original Mule Rider called the sock puppet out earlier today, and he disappeared.
Suddenly on the next thread, Bradley Effect made his debut, spewing the same BS talking points as the sock puppet. How genius.
bradley effect said...wonder if Obama promised blacks, reparations in exchange for votes? Michelle Malkin said that was a real possibility. I hope they don't riot Nov. 5th!
I know I will be flamed for being "racist," but these are legitimate concerns.
Your own personal demons and fears
with no basis in fact. Too bad for
you bradley effect. I don't harbor
that fear at all. Good luck to
you as you sweat through this week.
Race and Racism is a real factor
in this race and Barack both
benefits from it (Black voters) and
a detriment (voters like bradley
effect) to him as well. The chips
will fall and the folks that have
a problem because of race. Oh well
the folks that can get beyond race
and support his policies and
proposed programs, another Oh well.
So bradley effect, race is a factor
no doubt about it.
Riots, probability is highly
unlikely.
Go 'O'
re: AZ, From the East Valley Tribune:
"A poll conducted by Arizona State University/KAET-TV 8 and set for release today will also project the race as a tossup. 'It's dead even in Arizona, which is consistent with the other two polls,' ASU/KAET research director Bruce Merrill said Monday.
The latest round of survey results mark a dramatic shift from double-digit leads McCain held only a month ago. For example, Rasmussen had McCain ahead by 21 percentage points in a survey released on Sept. 29.
Kurt Davis, a co-leader of McCain's Arizona campaign, dismissed the surveys as 'interesting scientific theory' but meaningless so close to Election Day."
broberts and panic--If Bush is so bad why isn't Obama leading by more against the 3rd Bush term incarnate i.e. 72 y/o John McCain? McCain is running far better than ANYONE expected! And until the votes are cast these slim leads by Obama mean nothing.
McCain is backed by over 300 curnals and generals. Obama is a gamble on our future.
PA JOHN
good point
but the mythical 'bradley effect' was a hidden, silent thing that could not be identified...
unfortunately, the self-named troll on this site is ignorant of not only what the 'name' means but is sorely lacking in common sense & sensibilities IMHO
pa pissoir--Who is this mule guy you keep referring to? I just signed up today!
These slim leads by Obama are greater than any candidate who has lost at this stage of a campaign.
Could he lose? Sure. About a 3% chance.
brad,
the problem in your argument is that you consider a 7% margin with one week to go a 'slim' margin.
It is not.
Why can't McCain close the deal? Why can't he even get above 45%?
Why is his behavior so erractic?
Why did he pick a diva his own campaign says is unteachable to be his running mate?
Why are so many high profile republicans endorsing Obama?
Why are conservative pundits saying McCain ran the worst campaign ever?
Why do the wingnuts think their candidate is so bad, that their only chance of winning is racism?
I don't know why McCain is such a huge loser, but after 8 years of republican disaster I am enjoying this last 8 days of a winning Democratic campaign.
krashblind,
I think your synopsis of CO actually has a distinctly rural slant to it. Most of the suburbanites along the front range are not that concerned with the classic land and water issues that dominate the rural political landscape. Also there is a distinct feel to each city along the front range with those south of Denver considerably different than those north of Denver. For example, obviously the most extreme example, look at the difference between Boulder and the Springs.
I agree that Environment and pollution are much bigger issues in CO than they are in most states.
And Yes I was born in the 303, though I probly wouldn't have said it quite like that.
badger hair,
The third party voters don't bother me at all. I figure they're just disgruntled Mc voters so if they want to be symbolic with their votes, then godspeed!!!
"Among those who have already voted, 57% back Obama compared to 42% for McCain. The Republican has an 11-point lead among those who have not yet voted."
No doubt Ras is applying a likely voter screen. Some of those 11% will vote, some won't. The more dejected McCain's supporters get, the fewer will vote. As for the 15% Obama lead, well let's just say they're all likely voters :).
eve-- Even with all the "flaws" you listed he is still within striking distance of Obama! So the real question remains why can't Obama close the deal, since he has run such a flawless, exemplary campaign.
Isn't everyone happy that we are not counting on a large group of racists who are ashamed of themselves to win this election. I mean if I was actually hoping that there were a lot of guilt ridden racists that would end up voting for my candidate I would be so ashamed of myself that I would end up not voting at all.
GA needs a higher % of last minute 3rd party voters so that Obama can flip it
& hopefully Martin will get to 50% +1 to avoid a runoff for senate
IGNORE BRADLEY EFFECT.
For anyone "concerned" about McLame passing Obama on election day even though Obama is leading the early voting, just think of it this way. Evidence is pointing to about a 60-40 early voting lead for Obama and probably 1/3 of the electorate voting early is a safe bet. So that means McLame needs to win the final 2/3 of the electorate on election day 55-45 IN EVERY BATTLEGROUND TO EVEN TIE THE STATE AT 50-50. So you have to just ask yourself what are the odds that he could do that in every single state. Seems highly unlike to me.
sfergus483: FALSE, Reagan beat Jimmy Carter with a 10-point lead!
if 300 curnals support mccain, than we are in good hands.
what about bumfes? who do they support? and frale ? skingstf?
Who is this mule guy you keep referring to? I just signed up today!
You're a douche bag, and the fact "you just signed up today" proves my point.
moralmajoraty why did you hurt the colonels' feelings by leaving them out?
IGNORE HIM
Stephen Colbert is awesome
North Carolina is now Virginia
Virginia is now Maryland.
What the hell is Drudge up to?
And with regards to tightening, I would be even more strict. I think we need to see some sort of poll average (i.e. the RCP average or the Pollster "sentitive") close to within 2 points in these states for there to be tightening. If there are 8 polls out, and 2 of them show the race within 2 points, but the rest show larger leads, that's not real tightening.
I can't seem to understand why the polls would tighten, if they did. The media is now pretty pissed off at McCain, and McCain has simply been repeating his boring "socialist" attacks the last few days which did not work previously. Rasmussen, Research 2000 and Zogby all showed significant movement towards McCain, but I think we'll just have to regard that as coincidence. Gallup is usually the first to respond to trends and its showing upwards movement for Obama.
I am talking average of polls - 8 days before that election, Carter had a 2-3 aggregate lead, and the one and only debate was still to come.
Obama leads by 8.
I stand by my point. You can always find outlier polls. It doesn't change the facts.
polling 30 years ago was nothing at all like polling in the 21st century
apples & oranges - no comparison except that they are both fruity...
secret word - 'hosme'
Datamar seems to be a legit Florida pollster...
McCain truly has done a dismal job as a candidate. The RNC is running ads in Montana. McCain has a 5-7 point lead (or less) in Georgia and his home state of Arizona. McCain is behind in North Carolina and Virginia, and tied in Indiana.
All of those states went for Bush by double digits 4 years ago except for Virginia, which Bush won by 8.
Just 4 weeks ago I was hoping for an Obama victory with 273 electoral votes. Now, I'm thinking 375.
Also, these polls all come before the 30 minute infomercial Wednesday night. All those states that are close despite not seeing ads from Obama, like Arizona, could tighten. McCain has less than 10 million dollars with which to defend over 10 states.
"Could he lose? Sure. About a 3% chance."
Actually, I think that 3% is way too high. I mean, realistically, what would it take for McCain to win right now? The polls would have to move rapidly in his direction at about the rate of a point a day. Or he would have to win near 100% of undecided voters. Even then, it might not be enough, since so many people are voting early this year. Add Obama's very extensive ground game and his advertising advantage, it adds up to an Obama victory. McCain's only route is through some big, dramatic event -- which is far less likely than 3% -- and even that probably wouldn't do it.
The McCain people know this, as they are already starting the finger pointing and blame assigning. Charlie Cook was on Hardball tonight and basically said that the race is over, and that guy knows his political horse races. Nate's model is very good, but it isn't perfect. I think it is clearly overstating McCain's chances.
PA pissoir--What exactly is proving your point--that I signed up today and admit it? Okay, you got me I'm a noob! You win!
Herunar - We have an unusual candidate as the frontrunner who has somewhere between 50 and 52% of the vote. Undecideds apparently are disproportionately older, male, etc. They will likely "break" to McCain. How many polls show McCain at 40% or 42% of the vote - do you really expect McCain to get any less than 46% of the vote on election day?
yup, at least the troll admits his behavior is n00bish
revel in your ignordunce
Post a Comment