[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2012-October-31, 12:07, said:

this one is optimistic even by my standards... the one troubling aspect for me is obama's approval rating... as long as it is as high as it is, i don't think a blowout is possible

Note that the prediction in your link employs the old saw that 80% of the undecideds vote against the incumbent. But that's not true: The Simple Case for Saying Obama Is the Favorite

Quote

The FiveThirtyEight forecast explicitly accounts for the possibility that the polls are biased toward Mr. Obama — but it also accounts for the chance that the polls could be systematically biased against him.

Others argue that undecided voters tend to break against the incumbent, in this case Mr. Obama. But this has also not really been true in recent elections. In some states, also, Mr. Obama is at 50 percent of the vote in the polling average, or close to it, meaning that he wouldn’t need very many undecided voters to win.

A third argument is that Mr. Romney has the momentum in the polls: whether or not he would win an election today, the argument goes, he is on a favorable trajectory that will allow him to win on Tuesday.

This may be the worst of the arguments, in my view. It is contradicted by the evidence, simply put.

That's not to say that Romney has no chance to win -- he surely does. But we can pretty much discard the landslide predictions.

[Winstonm]

From the NYT article PassedOut linked:

Quote

To argue that Mr. Romney is ahead, or that the election is a “tossup,” requires that you disbelieve the polls, or that you engage in some complicated interpretation of them.

It seems the author substantiates my claims that there are those who disregard data in order to cling to a narrative belief system. When data and narrative are at odds, though, that system of belief becomes quite a burden to explain rationally.

[luke warm]

from the atlantic

Quote

• Colorado: Republicans, 38-35. Most Coloradans vote early, so this will go GOP.
  
• Florida: Democrats, 43-41. Republicans “share of the early vote … is 5 points higher than their share of voter registration.” Democrats will lose the state.
  
• Iowa: Democrats, 43-32. But back in late September, Democrats had a whopping 44 point lead.
  
• North Carolina: Democrats, 48-32. But in 2008, Democrats barely carried the state and had a 21 point lead. So Republicans will win it.
  
• Nevada: Democrats, 44-38. While Ball says Democrats are winning the state, this margin isn’t large enough for a big Obama win – not when everyone expects election day itself to go strong for Romney.

She refuses to call Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, or Wisconsin. And New Hampshire is not a real early voting state.

from politico

Quote

But by one important yardstick – early voting – the GOP is showing notable improvement in key battleground states.

According to data compiled by the United States Election Project and POLITICO, in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada and North Carolina, Republicans are running several points ahead of their 2008 pace, while Democrats are running several points behind, in percentage of early votes cast.

Those five are the only swing states that have party registration or offer the statistical breakdowns that enable the comparison.

and concerning PA, from the nyt

Quote

But there is a tangible sense — seen in Romney yard signs on the expansive lawns of homes in the well-heeled suburbs, and heard in the excited voices of Republican mothers who make phone calls to voters in their spare time — that the race is tilting toward Mr. Romney.

[PassedOut]

Winstonm, on 2012-November-02, 13:00, said:

From It seems the author substantiates my claims that there are those who disregard data in order to cling to a narrative belief system. When data and narrative are at odds, though, that system of belief becomes quite a burden to explain rationally.

I suppose it could be that the Romney cheerleaders expect many "undecideds" to vote against Obama for reasons they feel ashamed to admit to pollsters...

[luke warm]

Winstonm, on 2012-November-02, 13:00, said:

It seems the author substantiates my claims that there are those who disregard data in order to cling to a narrative belief system. When data and narrative are at odds, though, that system of belief becomes quite a burden to explain rationally.

lolol... sorta reminds me of you back in your 9/11 truther days...

PassedOut, on 2012-November-02, 13:17, said:

I suppose it could be that the Romney cheerleaders expect many "undecideds" to vote against Obama for reasons they feel ashamed to admit to pollsters...

yeah, a lot of people are simply ashamed to say they were wrong... we do know that romney has a huge lead in independents, as well

[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2012-November-02, 13:14, said:

from the atlantic

Quote

...

She refuses to call Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, or Wisconsin.

From the Atlantic article:

Quote

It's probably safe to conclude that Democrats are winning the early vote in Ohio.

Update: Early Voting Swamping GOP

WPTV in Palm Beach obtained an e-mail from a distressed Palm Beach County Republican who fretted that Democrats were “cleaning our clock.”

The e-mail said the early voting might drag down the GOP ticket in Palm Beach County.

The e-mail in part states:

Quote

The early and absentee turnout is starting to look more troubling.

As of yesterday, Republicans made up only 22% of early voters and 30% of returned absentee votes.

This is closer to (and worse than) 2008 where we saw 19% EV and 38% of the absentees. 2010 (our blowout year) was 33% of EV and 45% of AB.

Conclusion: The Democrat turnout machine in the county has been very effective and they are cleaning our clock. Even if Romney wins the state (likely based on polls), the turnout deficit in PBC will affect our local races.

Seek and ye shall find...

This post has been edited by PassedOut: 2012-November-02, 14:18

[luke warm]

PassedOut, on 2012-November-02, 14:11, said:

Seek and ye shall find...

like you, i'm only really interested in states that romney was projected to lose but which are now, suddenly, in plan

[mike777]

http://www.gallup.co...-like-2008.aspx

Ya as I said earlier I think the Republicans are using this poll, see the bottom part, to claim that most of the final 4-6% will go republican and that the state polls are biased expecting a repeat of 2008 rather than 2004.

For some reason I cannot cut and paste that portion.

[PassedOut]

Looks like the voter fraud investigation in Florida and Virginia is now expanding: Virginia voter fraud case expands to focus on GOP firm

Quote

The investigation into the arrest of a man on charges of dumping voter registration forms last month in Harrisonburg, Va., has widened, with state officials probing whether a company tied to top Republican leaders had engaged in voter registration fraud in the key battleground state, according to two persons close to the case.

A former employee of Strategic Allied Consulting, a contractor for the Republican Party of Virginia, had been scheduled to appear last Tuesday before a grand jury after he was charged with tossing completed registration forms into a recycling bin. But state prosecutors canceled Colin Small’s grand jury testimony to gather more information, with their focus expanding to the firm that had employed Small, which is led by longtime GOP operative Nathan Sproul.

Maybe the republicans are right that there is a lot of voter fraud that hasn't been noticed. I guess both parties have their legal teams ready to fight...

[awm]

Something to keep in mind is that Republican governors have made it substantially harder to vote early in several states, including Florida and Ohio. I'd expect this to reduce the total number of early votes cast, and the Democratic early vote advantage. However, some (but not all) of the people who don't vote early will vote on election day... so the Republican advantage from this will not be as large as the ground they make up in the early voter margin.

I'm wondering what the odds are that the election will be effectively decided by my usual bedtime around 11 pm Pacific Time. Ohio polls close at 4:30 pm (Pacific) and 6.5 hours is plenty of time to call it unless we have a recount type scenario. And it certainly seems likely that Ohio decides the race!

[kenberg]

I often yearn for the simpler days of old. When I was in college I took a variety of jobs, some long term, some short term. One very short term job was on an election day. My job was to drive to various polling places, pick up boxes of ballots, and haul them off to where they would be counted. I was 19, I am sure I was not vetted in any way, I don't recall signing anything, they just gave me the boxes, I hauled them somewhere, they paid me some money. In cash. This would be 1958 so it wasn't a presidential election, but still it was an election.

Also, the thought of early voting favoring one candidate or the other drives me a bit up the wall. I have voted in every presidential election, every gubernatorial election, every senate election, etc beginning in 1960. I vote on the first Tuesday in November. Playing f2f bridge on Thursday afternoon a lady at the table remarked she was going to go vote after the game. Ok. I have no idea who she voted for. I have no idea if early voters are Dems or Reps. I know political operatives have to worry about such things. I am very pleased that I do not have to do so.

About fraud. I can see how it might occur in the manner described above. Someone trashes registration forms, depriving someone of the opportunity to vote. It is less easy to see how to commit fraud by having people go to the polls pretending to be someone else. A person could do that I suppose, but why would he? It seems rather dangerous. A person who is not registered because he was too lazy to do so suddenly gets so inspired to vote that he is willing to risk imprisonment to do so? Or an illegal alien, Mexican or Martian or whatever, normally someone keeping a low profile, decides to take the risk? Or someone wanders through the streets soliciting unregistered voters to commit fraud for a price? Wouldn't it be easier, cheaper, and more effective to use the money to get out the vote of the many registered voters who don't bother to come to the polls? And, with modern access to affiliation information, you would have a far better estimate of what the person will actually do inside the booth.

I try hard not to be one of those old farts always grumbling about change, but there are times that I find the modern world very unfriendly. Just too much stuff to get worked up over. Still, I guess I will be making a New Year's resolution to learn how to tweet. Can't just dwell in the past.

[ArtK78]

Nate Silver's most recent analysis (around midnight last night) has Obama's chances of winning up to 83.7% with a projected electoral vote total of 305.3. While the numbers didn't change much from yesterday, the fact that they stayed essentially the same and there is one less day remaining to election day improves Obama's chances of winning.

[cherdano]

awm, on 2012-November-02, 21:47, said:

I'm wondering what the odds are that the election will be effectively decided by my usual bedtime around 11 pm Pacific Time. Ohio polls close at 4:30 pm (Pacific) and 6.5 hours is plenty of time to call it unless we have a recount type scenario. And it certainly seems likely that Ohio decides the race!

Your first out is Virginia (closing 7pm Eastern). If Obama wins Virginia, Romney would need some very surprising wins (Ohio is not enough), and those suprises would be even more unlikely if polls in Virginia haven't been too far off.

[y66]

The Simple Case for Saying That Obama Is Favored by Nate Silver

Quote

You may have heard some pushback about our contention that Barack Obama is the favorite (certainly not a lock) to win on Tuesday. I haven’t come across too many analyses suggesting that Mitt Romney is the favorite. But plenty of people say the race is a “tossup.”

What I find confounding is that the argument we’re making is exceedingly simple: Obama is ahead in Ohio.

Latest employment data for Ohio

[PassedOut]

After all the hoopla of the past couple of months, the president's chances look even better now than when this thread began: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased

Quote

My argument, rather, is this: we’ve about reached the point where if Mr. Romney wins, it can only be because the polls have been biased against him. Almost all of the chance that Mr. Romney has in the FiveThirtyEight forecast, about 16 percent to win the Electoral College, reflects this possibility.

Yes, of course: most of the arguments that the polls are necessarily biased against Mr. Romney reflect little more than wishful thinking.

Nevertheless, these arguments are potentially more intellectually coherent than the ones that propose that the race is “too close to call.” It isn’t. If the state polls are right, then Mr. Obama will win the Electoral College. If you can’t acknowledge that after a day when Mr. Obama leads 19 out of 20 swing-state polls, then you should abandon the pretense that your goal is to inform rather than entertain the public.

But the state polls may not be right. They could be biased. Based on the historical reliability of polls, we put the chance that they will be biased enough to elect Mr. Romney at 16 percent.

We'll know soon!

[y66]

PassedOut, on 2012-November-03, 08:44, said:

After all the hoopla of the past couple of months, the president's chances look even better now than when this thread began: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased


We'll know soon!

I dreamed that Larry Sabato from my alma mater summarized the latest swing state poll numbers on Face The Nation and Peggy Noonan of the Wall Street Journal weighed in with "Of course, there's a 16 percent chance that those numbers are wrong".

[y66]

A few minutes ago, 2 of the cutest 40 somethings in my neighborhood stopped by and asked if my wife had voted yet. This was pretty funny because she has been getting flack from family members for waiting until the last minute to vote before she heads out of town later today. There was a 2 hour wait at the court house so she went to an alternate site a few miles away in the Republican part of the county and voted. Even there, the wait was 30 minutes.

Nate Silver is projecting a 1.2 percent winning margin for Obama in Virginia. It will be extremely cool if that # holds up.

[PassedOut]

y66, on 2012-November-03, 09:56, said:

Nate Silver is projecting a 1.2 percent winning margin for Obama in Virginia. It will be extremely cool if that # holds up.

Knock on wood! I'm not up for a return to the Bush years so soon.

[PassedOut]

Closing statements:

Mitt Romney: My vision for America

President Barack Obama: My vision for America

Nothing left to do but vote, for those of us who haven't.

[PassedOut]

Deleted duplicate post.