Printable View
FiveThirtyEight:
After Romney Gains, Should Obama Concede Florida?
Obama has recently lost Florida in presidential polls held there recently by FiveThirtyEight. Obama had a firm grip on Florida all along until just now. We can have a Romney White House:
https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...de-florida/?hp
Gross mischaracterizations:
"Obama has recently lost Florida in presidential polls held there recently by FiveThirtyEight."
Nate Silver and his "FiveThirtyEight" team do not "hold" polls. They compile the overall polling data, from others, and use a predictive statistical model based on Sabremetrics and Silver's own tweaks to that, to comment on the progress of the polling and other factors, on the race.
Broken down into several categories. See the right column of the website for those overall updates. The Obamanator is doing marginally better in those summaries, in recent days. He's always been ahead, although by a lot more before Denver, and still is.
"Obama had a firm grip on Florida all along until just now."
The Obamanator had a lead in Florida until recently, but never a "firm grip". Now Romnification has a slight lead, based on polling in the last few weeks.
The import of the linked article is to discuss how much money and effort, The Obamanator should spend in the remaining weeks of the campaign, in Florida. As opposed to Ohio and Pennsylvania and other swing states where he retains his lead. Leads that have always been far more substantial than anything he had in Florida.
The most recent article from Silver, see below, goes into additional nuance and provisos, and does not present the dire picture that Edward portrays about the threat of Romnification.
For anyone invested in the mainstream outcome of this election, read Silver's articles, and plenty of other news sources. Edward's alarmism and hyperbole will not reflect any details, and so far have grossly exaggerated the broad strokes.
He's scared, he wants you to be scared, so you don't vote for anyone but The Obamanator. Even if you don't live in a swing state.
The MSM is on the same roll. Note the pieces that have started coming out about the possibility of an Electoral College tie. Or a close vote where the popular vote goes for one of the duopoly candidates, and the Electoral College vote goes for the other.
This is what I call, "Chatter in The Ball Game", it's designed to keep you agitated, your eyeballs on the TV or monitor screen. That's how they earn their advertising dollars, ratings. To justify the expense of hordes of pundits who have nothing new to say, so they come up with twists on the same old, same old.
The reason I tout Silver, and am pleased to see Edward is paying him some attention (even though he's not reporting what Silver says) is that Silver is known for his neutrality and expertise. And his consistent, accurate track record. Also, he presents nuance, explains why things are happening, rather than just being a cheerleader and alarm crier. If you saw him on The Daily Show this week, he's clearly a Geeks, Geek, a Nerds, Nerd. (Compliments, using the modern parlance for super intelligent obsessive expertise.)
Note Silver's explanation for why in the next two weeks, his projections will mostly likely become more volatile, because of the timing of the polls that will start coming in, faster and faster, and the way his model works.
His chart in the article about the ratio his model gives to polling vs. the state of the economy, as election day comes closer, is fascinating. Also his reasons why his model is written that way.
Gross conclusion, is not what "FiveThirtyEight" is about. At least not until the evening of November 6, and after.
https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/20/oct-20-calm-day-in-forecast-but-volatility-ahead/
Well Miles, neither of our candidates are even on the chart, but looking at O and R and all the various polling agencies, I'd say Silver is almost as accurate as RCP, and they both show Romney in the electoral lead, trending towards widening the gap...
I'm sure Obama and Axelrod have some dirty trick up their sleeve yet, but I don't think it's going to matter, and here's why:
I have a very un-scientific way of determining elections, but so far it's been very accurate. I just look at all the various forum postings, and give them certain weightings, based on time of day and such, and add up the averages. Then I trend them against the news, prices at the markets and gas stations, and a bunch of other little variables and without ever putting pen to paper, it gives me a fairly clear picture. I know it only samples those with internet access and an interest, but it works pretty well.
Although you wouldn't know it from the perspective of Northern California, a majority of the people are as fed-up with Obama as they were with Bush. Plain and simple; Very few people's lives are better than they were four years ago. For most people, four years of Obama has pretty much sucked... A lot...
It doesn't look very pretty for Barry Sotero...
As we have both said: There isn't much difference between the two...
Well except for the fact that Barry's track record is the exact opposite of Mitt's. As I've been saying: "If you want what Obama has been promising, then vote for Romney". I don't...
At this point I don't care about social issues anymore, I don't have that luxury, I just want somebody who can prop up the economy for a few more years so I can accumulate enough gold and guns to be able to take care of the people I love when the shit inevitably hits the socio-economic fan, because recovery is going to take decades.
Which isn't very far off...
A decent sized sail boat, a bag of Swiss Francs, some assault weapons, and it's off to the South Pacific...
.
"...Silver is almost as accurate as RCP, and they both show Romney in the electoral lead..."
I don't see where you get that Silver says Romnification is in the electoral lead, unless you're solely referring to Florida.
Overall, "FiveThirtyEight", as of yesterday, has The Obamanator winning the electoral college, "+3.2 since Oct. 13", and also the popular vote, "+0.1 since Oct. 13" (In a statistical tie, 50% to Romnifications 48.9%.)
Yes, his lead has narrowed, since Denver, and widened slightly, since last Tuesday.
No big bounce from the last debate, unlike Romnifications significant, but not commanding, bounce after the first presidential debate (aka Denver). The projections on the right hand column side of "FiveThirtyEight" are the ones I'm referring to.
Bear in mind, Silver firmly predicts more volatility in the polls, in the next two weeks. He explains why in yesterday's column.There is no new column for today. So far. (Now there is, it's about the, "Gender Gap".)
In the popular vote, this looks to be a squeaker, although it's too early to say for sure. That's why, given the predictable results in the Red and Blue States, all eyes are on the Swing States, particularly Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia.
Florida has always trended Republican. Even in '08, The Obamanator only won there by a squeaker. 50.91% to McCain's 48.9%. That's why saying, "Romnification is ahead in Florida!!!? All is doom and gloom for The Obamanator!!!!", is B.S..
Here's another prediction from Silver: "Obama loses at least one state he carried in 2008 - 99.5%" That's from his always interesting:
Scenario Analysis
How often the following situations occurred during repeated simulated elections.
- Electoral College tie (269 electoral votes for each candidate) 0.4%
- Recount (one or more decisive states within 0.5 percentage points) 10.1%
- Obama wins popular vote 63.8%
- Romney wins popular vote 36.2%
- Obama wins popular vote but loses electoral college 1.7%
- Romney wins popular vote but loses electoral college 5.8%
- Obama landslide (double-digit popular vote margin) 0.7%
- Romney landslide (double-digit popular vote margin) 0.2%
- Map exactly the same as in 2008 0.1%
- Map exactly the same as in 2004 <0.1%
- Obama loses at least one state he carried in 2008 99.5%
- Obama wins at least one state he failed to carry in 2008 4.6%
RealClearPolitics also has The Obamanator ahead in their overall projection. Close in the popular vote, but still set to win the Electoral College.
Could that change? That's the zillion dollar question.
(I just looked at Jonathan S. Tobin's linked article on RCP [Hilarious acronym, given its meaning in the sectarian alphabet soup of Leftist groupuscules!?] What a crock! Consider the source. Calling Silver "optimistic" is a complete lie. Silver is respected for his neutrality and success record, it's just conservative partisan spin, to call him "in the tank" for The Obamanator and the DP. If you read Conservative partisans, you'll get one story. Pragmatic Liberal Incrementalists, the opposite story. It's all hype.)
I don't look at national politics from the perspective of Northern Cali. I look at them from multiple perspectives across the country and outside. Your catastrophe scenario has some plausible basis, but I don't worry about things which I have no control over. I just keep my eye on them.
I'm familiar with the story that people are fed up with The Obamanator because of the state of the economy for the last four years. I think that accounts for Romnifications bounce after Denver.
The problem for Romnification is that he has no alternative proposals to The Obamanators. He claims he does, but he's been unable to present them. That's in great part due to the fact that his ideas are highly distasteful to the vast majority of Americans.
(Notice that The Obamanator has also been shy on details. He knows that telling "folks" he intends to "reform" Social Security and Medicare, by raising the eligibility age, reducing COLA's and other tweaking, will not be popular. But he's admitted as much, if you pay attention. He's willing to "compromise" on those aspects of entitlements, to "reform" fiscal policy.
He's just as much the servant of Wall Street and a NeoLiberal fiscal conservative, as Romnification. In fact, he has a longer and deeper track record, of doing/being so!?)
Romnification's trying to present a veneer of competence, without having to show any substance. Will that work? So far, crunching the numbers shows it's not working where it counts. Tomorrow night is big for both of them. I predict an even testier "interruption fest" from both of them. We shall see, what we see...
People made the same argument about Bush II, in 2000 and 2004. The first time about his father, the second time about him. He lost in 2000, and then stole it. He won in 2004 (partly because the DP nominated, wooden, robot like guys, until '08, partly "Swiftboating", partly the power of incumbency, and a whole lot of other factors) although voter suppression and vote counting fraud may have helped. (The Democratic Party has also done it. More, back in the day, but acting as if their hands are clean, is ludicrous if one knows their electoral history.)
Incumbents risk losing when the economy is bad. But, it's not a certainty. FDR was reelected.
The partisans on both sides have decided, so it all comes down to the centrist, moderate (i.e. mainstream conservative) few "Independents" in the heavily urbanized Swing State districts. Those are the polling compilations to watch.
As for "our" candidates, I'm hoping Dr. Stein gets a better result than McKinney did last time. That's all that can reasonably be expected. Greens run one of ours for president to send our message, stay on the ballot, energize ourselves and work for the long haul.
Given the structural obstacles in U.S. electoral law, the fact that we even exist is a bit of a miracle. We show the limits of the system. Its hypocrisy, exclusionary rules and culture. We present an alternative to the duopoly, a symbolic alternative, for the most part, granted.
Those, "far down the ticket" races matter, and part of our strategy is to focus on the idea that the race doesn't go to the swiftest. In time, it goes to the sure and steady.
Who knows? Enough people might look around one day, actually realize they're not being offered real solutions to real problems, look at the Green Party, and decide that we've offered a viable alternative for decades. That it's long past time to try us out!
Fantasy? Perhaps, but it's a better fantasy than what the status quo, set-up, shell game "reality" offers. We know the consequences of that. It's been proven over and over and over again.
Stein/Honkala 2012!
Anybody who doesn't know who Dr. Stein, and even more, Cheri Honkala are, check them out. They're the kind of people who I want to preside over my country's government. Check out their track records!