Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Obama's Electoral Cushion

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, ...

2009-10-02T06:02:34.748-04:00

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, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路...

2009-08-28T03:01:23.996-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業當酒店PT,酒店公關,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禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧當酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,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、學生兼差、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,想找打工、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打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。

水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??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,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^

外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 ...

2009-04-16T05:06:00.000-04:00

^^ very nice 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵...

2009-03-12T22:02:00.001-04:00

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

2009-03-12T22:02:00.000-04:00

徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, ...

2009-02-09T21:43:00.000-05:00

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,...

2009-02-08T21:53:00.000-05:00

Nate,You're the numbers genius, but this whole lin...

2008-11-11T00:38:00.000-05:00

Nate,
You're the numbers genius, but this whole line of argument has always seemed hugely faulty to me.

The underlying assumption is that each state keeps the same marginal relation to the national polls at all times. I'd need to see a lot of evidence before I find that remotely plausible. It's completely counterintuitive. Sure, if you if subtracted 9.3 (really 9.2) points from Obama's margin in every state, you get a tie. But in this fantasy where Obama magically loses exactly 9.2 points nationally (say a video appears of him juggling cats in college), does cat-juggler Obama also lose exactly 9.2 points in DC, and Utah, and Iowa? Or, more likely, are the margins in the deep-red and deep-blue states much less elastic than the purple ones?

Maybe I need correcting on this, but this whole scenario only seems to work if opinion is equally elastic in each state, which frankly makes no sense at all. To my eye you've moved to a level of abastraction that borders on meaningless here -- in baseball terms, you've moved from actual analysis all the way past Strat-o-matic & you're closing in on flipping for baseball cards.

Interesting thread, in theory. But in practice it'...

2008-11-10T22:05:00.000-05:00

Interesting thread, in theory. But in practice it's not a 1/1 relationship. You can't move the national percentage 8.6% without understanding the tidal shift in perception, allocation and emphasis.

If McCain were leading by 2% or similar in the national margin then he's perceived as the frontrunner and Obama is not wasting time in long-gone states like Indiana and North Carolina or Missouri. And McCain doesn't have to spend time and dollars attempting to salvage those states.

Instead, you have McCain surging into unfriendly turf like Iowa and Michigan and Minnesota and New Hampshire, etc., instead of abandoning them early, presumably improving his numbers there, as Obama undeniably did with late emphasis on states like Indiana and North Carolina and even Georgia and Montana. The entire perception and dynamic of the race changes, most notably in the media. It's not credible to freeze the November 3 variables in a vacuum and merely fiddle with the digits for purposes of simple conclusion. The entire early voting reality is dramatically altered, with Obama not piling up huge margins when his advantage was at apex. Most likely the GOP participation in early voting and on election day itself would have been given a boost.

This reminds me of advancement in horse racing analysis. Twenty or 30 years ago speed figures (Beyers) were taken as an absolute. You even had Andy Beyer making the nonsensical argument in his breakout book "Picking Winners" that there was no such thing as a killer pace, that the horse would finish with the same time and same positioning regardless of early strategy. Later that gave way to "trip handicapping," an analysis of Beyers in relation to what the horse encountered during the race. No way you can look at a racing outcome and merely shift the final margin 3 or 8 lengths, or whatever, and say Horse A had exactly this much margin for error. He got to the position where he finished based on critical variables within the race.

Besides, if the national margin moved 8.6%, or whatever, minus all the evolving differences I listed above, and nothing changed during the campaign other than the final margin, then the premise of this site and Pollster.com and others is long gone, i.e. that the vote is predictable based on polling.

Franken is now just 201 behind. It keeps closing.I...

2008-11-10T11:41:00.000-05:00

Franken is now just 201 behind. It keeps closing.

Incidentally for those talking about 2012, don't forget Arizona. But for the fact that it is McCain's home state, Obama would have won there too. 2012 is besides the point anyway. Unless Obama makes a complete mess of it, he will win at a canter in 2012 and no strong GOP candidate will step forward to take a beating. Remember, the GOP will not have racial scare tactics at their disposal next time because people will know Obama by his record rather than those lies.

I do however expect the GOP to recover somewhat in Congress if not by 2010 then certainly by 2012.

It would seem that the best places to put effort w...

2008-11-10T10:24:00.000-05:00

It would seem that the best places to put effort would be where the margin was the smallest, which would mean PA was better than NV or NM. [Of course, it is hard to tell what they all would have been with different effort.]

Nice analysis, but all those declaring 2012 alread...

2008-11-10T07:54:00.000-05:00

Nice analysis, but all those declaring 2012 already over should remember that Bush I won in 1988 with over 400 EVs and still got thrashed 4 years later. Recession and taxes did for him. In this regard Obama has an advantage by coming in during a period of recession so economic expectations are very low, rather than high as they were in 1988. But he still has to make good on a number of important campaign pledges to be in a strong position going into 2012:
- reduce the middle class tax burden. Given the state of the public finances this could be a tough one, but he made a big deal of it in the campaign
- get the US out of recession. It will probably get worse before it gets better, but it's likely the economic and political cycles will combine for him better than they did for either Bush
- extricate the US from Iraq. This could well take longer than the 16 months he's promised, but it has to be in place before 2012 or he will lose a lot of votes especially among the young

There's also healthcare reform, but he didn't push this as hard as HRC and it's perceived to be difficult so I think he could get away without doing this in the first term if he achieves good results on the other main campaign pledges.

For an incumbent, I think the politics are a lot more important than the maths. If he achieves good results on most of the major campaign pledges he will be reelected, probably in a landslide. But if he comes back to the electorate with the economy still very weak, higher taxes, and the US military still in Iraq, he will be in big trouble.

sfergus483 - The trouble with Petraeus as a possib...

2008-11-10T03:14:00.000-05:00

sfergus483 - The trouble with Petraeus as a possible 2012 candidate, is that with stop-loss, he will probably still be serving in the armed forces.

Brilliant Guys. You are giving us an intelligent i...

2008-11-10T02:26:00.000-05:00

Brilliant Guys. You are giving us an intelligent instrument that will make the electoral and governing process more transparent- like good companies really...
I am fascinated with your use of math to show the various voting patterns. You should get into the schools and help kids to make a connection to using math practically- maybe a presentation or Lern video

Thanks
James

The long, long odds for McCain to have won are, of...

2008-11-10T01:06:00.000-05:00

The long, long odds for McCain to have won are, of course, acknowledged. However, it does not follow that the Pennsylvania strategy was nonsensical. To the contrary, it is precisely because a 10-percent swing nationwide *as things stood* would have been needed for McCain to win that his PA gambit was his only semi-realistic option. If he chose to make his stand in NV/NM/CO, he would still have had to run the table in the eastern swing states. This was not going to happen with the national numbers as bad as they were. His only hope was to completely change the landscape in a single state or two. PA at least offered the dim possibility of a surprise win by finding populist traction in the Pennsyltucky portion of the state. This would then allow him to lose as many as four other states (IA, NM, CO, VA) and still come up a national winner. It was a hail-mary, but then nothing less would have worked with prevailing conditions as bad as they were for him.

The reason that Obama has an inherent advantage in...

2008-11-10T00:05:00.000-05:00

The reason that Obama has an inherent advantage in the electoral college could be that the Republican support is regional. They have very strong support in regions, but it's not enough to be meaningful elsewhere. They add to the popular vote, but they're "wasted" in the electoral college. But mostly, I think that it's reflective of solid strategy by the Obama camp.

The Democrats should definitely stick with the 50 State Strategy. Four years ago, Virginia, Indiana and North Carolina didn't look remotely close to turning blue. So stick with going after Georgia, the Dakotas, Montana and others. And remember that the Republicans will be trying their own 50 State Strategy to get them back.

I don't quite see Petraeus as a Democrat. He's called himself a Republican of the Bush Senior mold and didn't vote in the last election. Something about military influence, I think he was saying. I don't see him turning into a Republican candidate in 2012 either, but I guess we could get a Lincoln-McClellan dynamic between them.

Eric said...About 6 electoral votes will be moved ...

2008-11-09T22:58:00.000-05:00

Eric said...
About 6 electoral votes will be moved over to the Red column due to the 2010 Census.

Hmmm. By red states, are you including NM, NV, CO, VA, and FL? I would bet that at least two or three of these have rising populations, but they are BLUE states now! NV went for Obama by 12.4 points. At the very least these are tossups now.

If New Englanders and New Yorkers keep moving to NV, CO, and FL, then they will only get more blue.

rr, Nate's argument is that if 4.3% of the voters ...

2008-11-09T22:44:00.000-05:00

rr, Nate's argument is that if 4.3% of the voters switched their vote from Obama to McCain across all states, Obama would still have won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote; so probably there was an inherent bias towards Obama in the Electoral College, which is surprising; I always thought the opposite was true. It's a compelling argument, but what I don't like about it is that it uses only the margin of CO and IA as long as they're more than VA. If both IA & CO's margin was 5.6% then the flip % in Nate's argument will be 2.8% (instead of 4.3%) and that's not enough to lose the popular vote.

The 800,000 voters you mention are probably just in the 6 states needed to flip the EC. You can check what's the % of voters in the 6 states needed to flip and see whether the same % across all states would give the EC to McCain and the popular vote to Obama.

That's not actually saying all that much. In reali...

2008-11-09T22:41:00.000-05:00

That's not actually saying all that much. In reality, anything McCain could have done to flip those 800,000 votes would have flipped a whole bunch of votes in some other states too.

I crunched the same numbers for the 1992 election (which is the other one I have a spreadsheet on hand for). You can flip it to Bush by changing about 290,000 votes in the right places. They're spread out over a lot more states, but that's just because Clinton's marginal states tended to be small, whereas Obama's were mostly medium-sized to large. And Clinton won (slightly) more electoral votes than Obama...

i don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but i...

2008-11-09T22:16:00.000-05:00

i don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but i punched the numbers and determined even though obama won the popular vote by nearly 8,000,000 votes, mccain only needed 800,000 votes to switch in the six states nate mentioned to tip the election his way. obama could have lost the election in the electoral college with a nearly five point lead in the popular vote.

The Nebraska district is on that table; it's just ...

2008-11-09T21:38:00.000-05:00

The Nebraska district is on that table; it's just at the bottom, because Obama didn't win it by very much.

In any case, the point of doing this kind of analysis is not to find ties, but to figure out how much overall popular sentiment would have to have shifted for Obama to lose. That's still perfectly possible no matter how the Nebraska district works.

Nate, what about the Nebraska district that went f...

2008-11-09T21:32:00.000-05:00

Nate, what about the Nebraska district that went for Obama? Doesn't that eliminate the possibility of a 269 tie in all other scenarios? If so, your point here is entirely academic.

A couple of Delta counties in Arkansas for A-A maj...

2008-11-09T20:52:00.000-05:00

A couple of Delta counties in Arkansas for A-A majorities, but once you get away from the Delta the A-A percentage drops into the 20s.

Several Eastern OK counties have sizable Native American minorities but by no means are they predominate.

A-A is the most frequently self-reported ancestry in South AK, ditto for N-A in East OK. Whether their self-reported race is a minority or majority is secondary, what matters is that the ancestry map traces the redshift map quite closely. "American" & "Native" = redshift. Rest of the country = blueshift.

MinnesotaGeorgia 99% of precincts (33 uncounted?)A...

2008-11-09T20:47:00.001-05:00

Minnesota

Georgia 99% of precincts (33 uncounted?)

Alaska remaining to be counted -- 99% of precincts (4 uncounted?)

Missouri (difference is < 2 votes/precinct)

Are they counting during the weekend?

November 9, 2008 4:18 PM

Still seems like the Georgia count is low, and Obama only lost there by 200,000 votes. I'm still holding out hope!

WV Solych: finding relief in that you're still alive to fight again. "Rick Davis was disappointed in the outcome, but he has solych in 2012"

@DavyAnyone you thinks Southern Arkansas is predom...

2008-11-09T20:47:00.000-05:00

@Davy

Anyone you thinks Southern Arkansas is predominantly African American or that Eastern Oklahoma is predominantly Native American either doesn't know how to look at Census numbers or doesn't understand what the word predominant means.

Or you could look at Congressional Districts.

The Eastern Oklahoma Congressional District is CD2. It has a Native American population of 17.1% and a White Population of 71.1%

The Southern Arkansas Congressional District is CD4. It has an African-American population of 24.4% and a White Population of 71.1%

Therefore, both Eastern Oklahoma and Southern Arkansas are predominantly Southern White districts.