Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: World's Simplest Election Projection

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-10-09T03:17:45.004-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、...

2009-09-09T23:39:56.098-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

^^ nice blog!! ^@^徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社...

2009-03-11T04:52:00.000-04:00

^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信...

2009-03-11T04:51:00.000-04:00

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-02-11T22:49:00.000-05:00

If Barr can win 10% of the Republican vote I don't...

2008-06-13T16:19:00.000-04:00

If Barr can win 10% of the Republican vote I don't see how McCain has a chance and considering the Ron Paul movement and how much many GOP people don't like McCain, that seems entirely possible.

Speaking of turnout and party I.D., given the grow...

2008-06-13T13:04:00.000-04:00

Speaking of turnout and party I.D., given the growing signs of an alliance between Ron Paul and Bob Barr, I think the pollsters and analysts ought to start thinking about the potential impact of a third-party candidacy.

The mainstream media aren't going to give this much coverage, I think partly because neither Barr nor Paul are pro-Israel and the media tends to ignore those voices. But it's not going to matter, because the Barr/Paul crowd is substantial. Paul got 10%-25% of the votes in the Republican primaries, even after McCain had locked it up.

Paul is going to have his own convention in Minneapolis during the Republican convention. It's going to draw 11,000 people, and while the media will surely marginalize the event I don't think that will keep maybe 5-10% of the total vote from going to Barr, depending on how badly McCain navigates the fissures in the Republican Party.

A more realistic projection accounting for the env...

2008-06-13T12:55:00.000-04:00

A more realistic projection accounting for the environmental differences between now and 2004:

Democratic Turnout:65% (there's a pumped up base out there, and African American turnout will be far higher than 2004). A 3% turnout spike is more in line with the reality for Obama.

Democratic voting: 85-10-4 Obama/McCain/Nader...Obama already has 75% of the Democratic vote and the wounds from a contested primary are still raw. He'll continue to close that number down. McCain will get around 10% among Democrats, and Nader will get his usual 4% in the Democratic Party--if I'm being generous with the perennial candidate, you can give his numbers to McCain it doesn't make a difference.

Turnout for Republicans: 58%--the base is disillusioned with McCain and many will stay home. A four percent Republican turnout drop isn't unrealistic given the winds. The Republican vote 83/12/5 McCain/Obama/Barr. Obama is already picking up some pretty prominent conservative support. He's also doing much better than any recent Democrat among the Evangelicals (some of whom are disillusioned with the war). Increasing Obama's Republican share to 12% is pretty realistic and conservative. McCain has real problems with some gun rights advocates. Bob Barr is a hero to the pro-gun right. He will pick up significant support among the gun community; Barr will also probably be the destination of choice for Ron Paul's flock (which is about 10% of the party), so giving Barr 5% Republican support is way on the conservative side.

Obama will probably win independents. Independents favor a generic Democrat strongly. The long primary season turned Independents off of the Democratic Party, but the proper running mate, and time in the rear view will probably drive the Independents to Obama. I think 51/46/2/1 Obama/McCain/Barr/Nader is a reasonable and conservative estimate.

I think 57% independent turnout is probably about accurate--Independents had high levels of participation in the Democratic Primary and it should go up from 2004.

That leaves us with 60.6% turnout--the same as 2004, but a distribution of 54 Obama/41 McCain/2 Barr/2 Nader. Obama by 13. I don't think this election will be close...

Actually, Party ID as of Nov 2004 was only about 1...

2008-06-13T10:04:00.000-04:00

Actually, Party ID as of Nov 2004 was only about 1.5% off between the two parties: http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/party_affiliation/party_affiliation/summary_of_party_affiliation

Now it's about 7 times that.

IMO, opinion while Obama is getting a bit of a bou...

2008-06-13T09:07:00.000-04:00

IMO, opinion while Obama is getting a bit of a bounce he's also drifting as a story line. He's clearly doing some homework and administrative stuff now but he's not making stories except mostly defensive ones such as on his rumor swat team and his VP vetting team. Meantime, McCain is still getting too much of a free ride.

It seems like Obama should win by about 20%. But I...

2008-06-13T01:22:00.000-04:00

It seems like Obama should win by about 20%. But I like to see things in a special way.

Low Republican party ID means a relatively high pr...

2008-06-13T00:55:00.000-04:00

Low Republican party ID means a relatively high proportion are most likely "hard-core" partisans whereas self-described Democrats are disproportionately "leaners". Even if Republicans are demoralized, hard-core partisans will have much higher turnout than leaners. This will tend to shrink the party ID gap among actual voters.

For example, assume hard-core Dems turnout at 85%, hard-core Republicans at only 80%, and leaners on both sides turn out at 58%. So Dems have higher overall turnout, right? No, not if 10% are hard-core Reps, 10% hard-core Dems, 19% lean Republican, 28% lean Democrat, and 33% are indies. In this case, overall Republican turnout would be 66% to Dems' 65%.

Also consider that in 2004 exit polls party id was 37-37-26 (R-D-I) but pre-election polls gave Dems a 5-point party ID advantage. Other factors aside, Republicans historically have higher turnout due to their demographics. Enthusiasm will be a factor, but it cuts both ways. McCain may see low conservative enthusiasm, while Obama may see low enthusiasm from Clinton supporters. It's too early to tell whether Obama will have a clear overall advantage in enthusiasm, and how much that will affect turnout (or whether it's already baked into the party id figures).

To try to adjust for this, I raised the overall Republican turnout to 65% and lowered Dems to 60% and it becomes a virtual tie.

Some other sources of variance.(1) The type of scr...

2008-06-12T23:25:00.000-04:00

Some other sources of variance.

(1) The type of screen used to select "likely voters."

(2) Whether the question on vote intention is "contaminated" prior questions in the same survey.

(3) The kind of "weighting" of the survey results, for example, do they weight or adjust the data for party ID.

Someone help feed the Junkie. I am trying to expl...

2008-06-12T23:09:00.000-04:00

Someone help feed the Junkie. I am trying to explain to someone why there can be such variance among the polls within a state. I understand some of the obvious reasons; sample size, date, phone/mailing, etc. Am I missing some other reasons?

What happened to the "whitey tape" post?

2008-06-12T22:51:00.000-04:00

What happened to the "whitey tape" post?

What about the amazing number of newly registered ...

2008-06-12T22:24:00.000-04:00

What about the amazing number of newly registered Dems? Does this turnout model take into account the number of Dems has increased substantially?

jgabriel, I agree. When I wrote that the black vot...

2008-06-12T22:20:00.000-04:00

jgabriel, I agree. When I wrote that the black vote would be "decisive," I was assuming an otherwise close election. If it's not very close, then the black vote won't be decisive.

I'd point out that the 2004 election was razor close in Wisconsin, so a one-third increase in black turnout there could conceivably make a difference if the election were that close this time.

I especially agree with this: "Obama's personal and policy appeal across a broad range of the electorate is what will be decisive."

Junkie and Anon who wrote last: I'm going to have ...

2008-06-12T21:52:00.000-04:00

Junkie and Anon who wrote last:

I'm going to have to ask you two to stop posting here. If this becomes a trend -- snarkalicious comments on an already brilliant site -- well, I'm going to be fired within the next two weeks for getting crap done.

Charles Pluckham: "The biggest turnout increase fo...

2008-06-12T21:46:00.000-04:00

Charles Pluckham: "The biggest turnout increase for Democrats will be black voters, and I think they'll be decisive in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin."

I can't speak to MI, WI, or OH, though some of the arguments I'm about to make probably apply in those states too. That said, the black vote in Pennsylvania is important, but it won't be 'decisive'.

PA has several large to middle sized population regions: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, State College, Harrisburg, and Erie. Only Philadelphia is dominated by the black vote - which balances Appalachian votes in the rural areas.

The black vote is 10.8% of PA's population (2006 census estimates), less than the national average. Even assuming - all other numbers being equal - that Obama increases the black vote by 10% in 2008, and that 95% vote for him, you're looking at, maybe, a 0.5 - 1.0 % increase in his vote totals. Not enough to 'swing' the election, or be 'decisive' unless the PA vote is already in the 'too close to call' range.

It's a state where most conservatives and moderates have a libertarian streak that leaves them repulsed by things like the Patriot Act, and it's largely pro-labor. Frankly, a lot of the pro-Clinton vote in those areas came from the belief that she was better on health care and labor issues. Latent racism and/or resentment about affirmative action exist there, but are only secondary factors at most.

For example, one person I talked to stated that he was concerned that lower middle class people wouldn't be covered under Obama's health plan because it lacked mandates - and this was a definitely 'leans conservative' guy. That was a pretty common concern, actually. There are more people paying attention to the issues and policy differences than the pundits think.

Meanwhile, a lot of Pennsylvanians think McCain is more 'moderate' than, or equally moderate as, Obama.

And that's where PA will be decided - in convincing that part of the electorate that Obama is better than McCain on the issues they care about. It sounds naive and idealistic, I know. But that's really where PA will be decided, and I suspect for the other Rust Belt states you mentioned too.

That means Obama needs: to shoot down right-wing smears and attacks that distract from the important issues with a quick response team; to educate voters on McCain's real, very conservative, Senate voting record; to present himself as a competent leader who will fight for them with better policies than McCain; and to project that 'Presidential aura' that assures them he can handle a national security crisis.

Given the national mood, and the GOP's record over the past 7 years, most of that should be pretty easy. Quick responses to GOP smears and attacks may be the most important factor in keeping the voters in PA, and the other states mentioned, from being distracted - and to keep them focused on the things they dislike about GOP governance.

Finally, the black population isn't large in any of those states. The US national average is 12.8%. In WI, it's 6.0%; PA, 10.3%; OH, 12%, and MI, 14.3% (2006 US census estimates). An increase in black participation should be important in OH, where it was suppressed by an undersupply of voting machines in minority areas during the 2004 election, and it might be important in both Ohio and Michigan, where the polls are still very close.

It's unlikely to be decisive in WI or PA, though it is important for downticket races.

So don't rely too much on identity analysis to predict this election's outcome. Obama brings so much more to the table, and it's his skills and policies that are likely to be the 'decisive' factor. Getting out the black vote is important; Obama's personal and policy appeal across a broad range of the electorate is what will be decisive.

.

McCain will never see this. He can't use a compute...

2008-06-12T21:30:00.000-04:00

McCain will never see this. He can't use a computer.

Have you created this site to keep us political ju...

2008-06-12T20:35:00.000-04:00

Have you created this site to keep us political junkies diverted from what is going on in this election. Do you think that if you make this site addicting enough that we'll miss the press-conference where Obama admits to being a radical Muslim/fringe Christian with a crazy preacher, or a terrorist spreading his terror one fist jab at a time? Clever ploy, but we won't be distracted from the big issues this time. Issues like flag pins, lobbyist advisors, and whether or not McCain should use a green backdrop.

He's lurching, both rhetorically and physically. I...

2008-06-12T20:03:00.000-04:00

He's lurching, both rhetorically and physically. It's starting to look almost sad.

I'm getting all choked up! But seriously, in the unlikely event that this really turns into a rout, my #1 reason for supporting Obama will come into play. He's the only democrat since LBJ who I think is capable of the organizational competence and sophistication to milk the maximum legislative benefit out of his "mandate".

I'd play with the pary i.d. numbers slightly. Whi...

2008-06-12T19:21:00.000-04:00

I'd play with the pary i.d. numbers slightly. While Dems have the advantage, they may be off by a % or 2 and too strongly favoring the Dems. Alot of people identifying Dem now are new to the party and easily 1-3% could be pulled back to independent or GOP before November.

The biggest turnout increase for Democrats will be...

2008-06-12T19:06:00.000-04:00

The biggest turnout increase for Democrats will be black voters, and I think they'll be decisive in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. They also could swing North Carolina, Missouri, Virginia and maybe even Mississippi.

The next most important group will be Hispanics, who are leaving very heavily in favor of Obama. Turnout will be the key there, and if they really boost it, then along with blacks you could imagine Texas being swung, also that would need help from a collapse in the McCain campaign and Republican disarray, third-party defections, and general malaise.

I think the youth vote is interesting. Get-out-the-vote campaigns in 2000 and 2004 raised college turnout to nearly 75% in 2004, so it's hard to imagine a significant boost from the surge of enthusiasm on campuses, although maybe it would have an impact in North Carolina and Virginia.

The harder nut to crack is non-collegiate youth, which stuck in the low-30s in '00 and '04. Some of that will be taken care of by the increase in black turnout, but white non-collegiate turnout is probably the hardest of all to increase because this is a group that, in general, doesn't pay attention to news in any form.

I'd be optimistic about females and Obama, especially if Obama picks a woman other than Hillary Clinton. If he picks Clinton, he'll energize the Republicans and might alienate a significant number of independents, both men AND women, who don't particularly trust her.

All in all, I think Democrats have good reason for optimism, as long as there isn't some bombshell on Obama that we're not aware of. Also, I think if McCain picks Sarah Palin, the popular Republican governor of Alaska, that he could make some inroads, especially if Obama picks a male running mate.

On the plus side for Obama, the surprising early meltdown of McCain could turn this into a real rout. You never know what will happen, but the more I see McCain on the tube, the more shockingly bad he comes across. He's lurching, both rhetorically and physically. It's starting to look almost sad.

Also on the plus side, and related to McCain's problems as a candidate, is the fraying of Republican unity. The far right-wing, which is about one-third of the Republican Party, is unhappy with McCain, as shown by Ron Paul's continued strong showing in the spring primaries.

That's going to be accentuated in September, when Paul holds a parallel convention in Minneapolis that will be just as well attended as the main Republican convention and a whole lot more enthusiastic. You could easily imagine Bob Barr drawing close to 10% of the vote as a result.

Obama's biggest danger might be overoptimism among his campaign and Democrats in general!

I honestly think that turnout will be upwards of 7...

2008-06-12T18:29:00.000-04:00

I honestly think that turnout will be upwards of 70%, well at least for Democrats.