November 04, 2008

Election Projection, Final Version

(Basically, I updated the graphic with the new poll data and backed out on leaning Missouri to Obama)

Yesterday Karl Rove spoke at Washington University. I wanted to go but didn't. But as I remarked to my friend, "How appropriate it would be to go see Karl Rove speak at the end of his era, and the next day vote in the dawn of the next era."

It's not news, but Barack Obama will become the 44th President of the United States.

There will be more polls so I won't call this my last update, though I may not have time for another. Here's the analysis.

I maintain that Barack Obama's core of 311 EVs (Kerry+IA+NM+CO+VA+NV+OH) is safe, even though Ohio has tightened a bit recently. I'd have to say I can't count McCain's core as being any larger than 132 EVs. It is unlikely that he will lose any of ND, GA, AZ, or MT, but the numbers just aren't there to call those EVs safe for McCain.

The remaining (non-safe) states are:
Florida (27)
North Carolina (15)
Missouri (11)
Indiana (11)
North Dakota (3)
Georgia (15)
Arizona (10)
Montana (3)

Florida - I would love to call Florida for Obama. It's just a whisper away, but I just can't do it. Four days ago it would have been all but locked up, but there has also been tightening here. Rasmussen, one of the best pollsters, went from Obama 51 McCain 47 on 10/26 to McCain 50 Obama 49 on 11/2. That's just one poll, but to really look for trends it's best to watch how numbers move within a pollster. Strong Obama.

North Carolina - More than any other state, North Carolina's result will be determined by turnout. There's apparently some rain there today, which is apparently bad for Democrats. I show Obama with a significant but very slight lead. The latest poll in NC is from American Research Group, whom I don't trust too much. The four polls before that show McCain ahead, albeit by 1, 1, 1, and 3 pts. Weak Obama.

Missouri - The show-me state has become the ultimate swing state. As I'm sure you've heard before, Missouri is (I believe) 25 for the last 26 elections in going with the winner (went against Eisenhower's re-election in '56) but this year runs a little redder than the median, though when Obama surged a month ago, Missouri moved bluer faster than most states. That trend has settled down, and of the last 6 polls in the state, there are four ties, one Obama 1 pt lead, and one McCain 1 pt lead. There are few areas in the country as poor as St. Louis City in running an election (in 2004 they had to extend voting hours to 10:00 PM from 7:00 PM) and the results always come in late, so MO will be among the later states called. I just don't know what to do with this state. Due to the confusion in the city, voter purges might be possible, but on the other hand I expect turnout to be very high. My precinct is largely African-American, and we were literally lined up by the hundreds before the polls even opened. My gut tells me Missouri might stay red, but all my objective indicators give an ever-so-slight advantage to Obama. (Very) Weak Obama. Weak McCain.

Indiana - For all the talk of Indiana's historical red-ness, Bill Clinton only lost the state by 4 in '92 and 5.5 in '96. Popular Senator Evan Bayh was on the VP shortlist, and the state overperformed for Obama in the primaries. On the other hand, Obama's only led in 2 of the last 9 polls (in fairness, McCain only has in 4 but his leads have been larger) and the state never really shifted too far after the economic crisis. Since the state has been underpolled I tried turning down the sensitivity, but it still just shows a big swing state mess. I may very well come back to this one, but for now I'll say that the first indicator of the evening won't lead to a 6:30 concession speech. (Very) Weak McCain.

North Dakota - This state, part of the rural west, has suffered from a mighty dearth of polling. Indicators show it will be surprisingly close, but Obama withdrew from the state during the Palin bounce and he underperformed during the primaries. Weak McCain.

Georgia - Georgia, I feel, is just being a tease. The race there has tightened very dramatically, but McCain continues to average over 50% - a key threshold. While reports indicate that early voting turnout has been exceptionally high, Georgia would be an upset for the ages. Strong McCain.

Arizona - There are more undecideds in John McCain's home state than in Georgia, so McCain is not averaging 50% here even though his lead is about the same. But if you live in Arizona and haven't decided who you're voting for, I can't help but feel like that's not good for John McCain. Still, Obama's never led a poll here and underperformed during the primaries. Strong McCain.

Montana - This state has been a big tease for Dems all year. It also suffers from a dearth of polling; nonetheless, Obama's only lead in four months came from a university-comissioned poll, which are notoriously untrustworthy. Still, McCain isn't at 50% here either. One other issue is that Ron Paul has made the ballot in MT. Apparently I'm the only person in the country who thinks that this factor is likely to pull more votes from Obama than McCain, as Obama/Paul (now there's a ticket) shared the same young, energized voter demographics in the primaries (and their fundraising). As in North Dakota, Obama also pulled his resources here after the Palin bounce, which you may remember was particularly strong in the rural west. Strong McCain.

Final Analysis - I hate to call MO and IN one way or the other. The other states here could very easily be up for grabs, but also definitely have a lean. I'm really growing irritated by all these sites that use real statistics in their models, but then won't make any calls, or are very conservative. Who does it help to call 105 EVs "pure tossups" on the day of the election? Of course, I don't have much to risk if I'm wrong, but a four point lead on the basis of a weighted average of 30 polls in the last month is not a statistical tie.

Anyway, the way it's currently added up shows Obama 364, McCain 174 Obama 353, McCain 185 with Obama 353 McCain 185 Obama 364, McCain 174 and Obama 375 McCain 163 being the second- and third-most likely scenarios.

I project the popular vote to be Obama 53.1% to McCain 45.9%. Obama has currently led 278 consecutive polls in my model dating back to September 15. He is up 371-32 in the signs test and 15.8-0.0 in the weighted signs test. The polling averages are Obama 50.9% McCain 43.9%, which projected forward give you the bold numbers above.

The best guesses I have for state-by-state vote projections are given in the following table. I'm sorry it's messier than ever. There are no fudge factors in the following projections (i.e., I can't look at one state and say "hey, that should be 0.6 pts higher") but there is still subjectivity in terms of how sensitive the model is to new information (currently I give a poll a half-life of 5 days, down from 30 in June).

Note: I called Indiana above for McCain even though the math predicts (an insignificantly small) Obama victory, so my 353-185 differs from the graphic's 364-174.

Also, if you'd like a copy of my spreadsheet with all the data, I'd be happy to email it to you.

Election Projection, House Version

Doing the House races sucks because there is so little data. Many races rated by some sites as tossups didn't even have a single poll, and a very large number only had polls commissioned by one of the candidates, so there was very poor data to go on.

Nonetheless, here are my best projections (the second one is the number of state delegations controlled by each party - more relevant when an electoral tie was feasible)



And I'm sorry for the most ungodly long table ever, but here you go. A few races worth watching are AK-AL, where Don Young might be kicked out of the House for the first time since 1973 for, believe it or not, being corrupt. Also, MN-06 is Michele Bachmann's district; she's been mentioned here before. Florida has many hotly contested races. PA-12 is the district where Paul Murtha called his western Pennsylvania constituents racists - his 34 year career may come to an end. WY-AL is also a very close race.




DistrictProjection
AL1Safe Rep
AL2Weak Rep
AL3Safe Rep
AL4Safe Rep
AL5Safe Dem
AL6Safe Rep
AL7Safe Dem
AK1Safe Dem
AZ1Strong Dem
AZ2Safe Rep
AZ3Safe Rep
AZ4Safe Dem
AZ5Strong Dem
AZ6Safe Rep
AZ7Safe Dem
AZ8Strong Dem
AR1Safe Dem
AR2Safe Dem
AR3Safe Rep
AR4Safe Dem
CA1Safe Dem
CA2Safe Rep
CA3Safe Rep
CA4Strong Dem
CA5Safe Dem
CA6Safe Dem
CA7Safe Dem
CA8Safe Dem
CA9Safe Dem
CA10Safe Dem
CA11Safe Dem
CA12Safe Dem
CA13Safe Dem
CA14Safe Dem
CA15Safe Dem
CA16Safe Dem
CA17Safe Dem
CA18Safe Dem
CA19Safe Rep
CA20Safe Dem
CA21Safe Rep
CA22Safe Rep
CA23Safe Dem
CA24Safe Rep
CA25Safe Rep
CA26Safe Rep
CA27Safe Dem
CA28Safe Dem
CA29Safe Dem
CA30Safe Dem
CA31Safe Dem
CA32Safe Dem
CA33Safe Dem
CA34Safe Dem
CA35Safe Dem
CA36Safe Dem
CA37Safe Dem
CA38Safe Dem
CA39Safe Dem
CA40Safe Rep
CA41Safe Rep
CA42Safe Rep
CA43Safe Dem
CA44Safe Rep
CA45Safe Rep
CA46Safe Rep
CA47Safe Dem
CA48Safe Rep
CA49Safe Rep
CA50Safe Rep
CA51Safe Dem
CA52Safe Rep
CA53Safe Dem
CO1Safe Dem
CO2Safe Dem
CO3Safe Dem
CO4Safe Dem
CO5Safe Rep
CO6Safe Rep
CO7Safe Dem
CT1Safe Dem
CT2Safe Dem
CT3Safe Dem
CT4Toss Up
CT5Weak Dem
DE1Safe Rep
FL1Safe Rep
FL2Safe Dem
FL3Safe Dem
FL4Safe Rep
FL5Safe Rep
FL6Safe Rep
FL7Safe Rep
FL8Weak Dem
FL9Safe Rep
FL10Safe Rep
FL11Safe Dem
FL12Safe Rep
FL13Safe Rep
FL14Safe Rep
FL15Strong Rep
FL16Safe Rep
FL17Safe Dem
FL18Safe Rep
FL19Safe Dem
FL20Safe Dem
FL21Toss Up
FL22Strong Dem
FL23Safe Dem
FL24Strong Dem
FL25Strong Rep
GA1Safe Rep
GA2Safe Dem
GA3Safe Rep
GA4Safe Dem
GA5Safe Dem
GA6Safe Rep
GA7Safe Rep
GA8Weak Dem
GA9Safe Rep
GA10Safe Rep
GA11Safe Rep
GA12Strong Dem
GA13Safe Dem
HI1Safe Dem
HI2Safe Dem
ID1Weak Dem
ID2Safe Rep
IL1Safe Dem
IL2Safe Dem
IL3Safe Dem
IL4Safe Dem
IL5Safe Dem
IL6Safe Rep
IL7Safe Dem
IL8Strong Dem
IL9Safe Dem
IL10Strong Dem
IL11Safe Dem
IL12Safe Dem
IL13Safe Rep
IL14Weak Dem
IL15Safe Rep
IL16Safe Rep
IL17Safe Dem
IL18Safe Rep
IL19Safe Rep
IN1Safe Dem
IN2Safe Dem
IN3Weak Rep
IN4Safe Rep
IN5Safe Rep
IN6Safe Rep
IN7Safe Dem
IN8Strong Dem
IN9Safe Dem
IA1Safe Dem
IA2Safe Dem
IA3Safe Dem
IA4Strong Rep
IA5Safe Rep
KS1Safe Rep
KS2Safe Dem
KS3Safe Dem
KS4Safe Rep
KY1Safe Rep
KY2Safe Rep
KY3Safe Dem
KY4Safe Rep
KY5Safe Rep
KY6Safe Dem
LA1Safe Rep
LA2Safe Dem
LA3Safe Dem
LA4Strong Rep
LA5Safe Rep
LA6Safe Dem
LA7Strong Rep
ME1Safe Dem
ME2Safe Dem
MD1Weak Rep
MD2Safe Dem
MD3Safe Dem
MD4Safe Dem
MD5Safe Dem
MD6Safe Rep
MD7Safe Dem
MD8Safe Dem
MA1Safe Dem
MA2Safe Dem
MA3Safe Dem
MA4Safe Dem
MA5Safe Dem
MA6Safe Dem
MA7Safe Dem
MA8Safe Dem
MA9Safe Dem
MA10Safe Dem
MI1Safe Dem
MI2Safe Rep
MI3Safe Rep
MI4Safe Rep
MI5Safe Dem
MI6Safe Rep
MI7Weak Dem
MI8Safe Rep
MI9Strong Dem
MI10Safe Rep
MI11Safe Rep
MI12Safe Dem
MI13Safe Dem
MI14Safe Dem
MI15Safe Dem
MN1Safe Dem
MN2Strong Rep
MN3Toss Up
MN4Safe Dem
MN5Safe Dem
MN6Toss Up
MN7Safe Dem
MN8Safe Dem
MS1Safe Dem
MS2Safe Dem
MS3Safe Rep
MS4Safe Dem
MO1Safe Dem
MO2Safe Rep
MO3Safe Dem
MO4Safe Dem
MO5Safe Dem
MO6Safe Rep
MO7Safe Rep
MO8Safe Rep
MO9Strong Rep
MT1Safe Rep
NE1Safe Rep
NE2Safe Rep
NE3Safe Rep
NV1Safe Dem
NV2Safe Rep
NV3Toss Up
NH1Strong Dem
NH2Safe Dem
NJ1Safe Dem
NJ2Safe Rep
NJ3Toss Up
NJ4Safe Rep
NJ5Safe Rep
NJ6Safe Dem
NJ7Weak Dem
NJ8Safe Dem
NJ9Safe Dem
NJ10Safe Dem
NJ11Safe Rep
NJ12Safe Dem
NJ13Safe Dem
NM1Weak Dem
NM2Strong Dem
NM3Safe Dem
NY1Safe Dem
NY2Safe Dem
NY3Safe Rep
NY4Safe Dem
NY5Safe Dem
NY6Safe Dem
NY7Safe Dem
NY8Safe Dem
NY9Safe Dem
NY10Safe Dem
NY11Safe Dem
NY12Safe Dem
NY13Safe Dem
NY14Safe Dem
NY15Safe Dem
NY16Safe Dem
NY17Safe Dem
NY18Safe Dem
NY19Strong Dem
NY20Strong Dem
NY21Safe Dem
NY22Safe Dem
NY23Safe Rep
NY24Strong Dem
NY25Toss Up
NY26Safe Rep
NY27Safe Dem
NY28Safe Dem
NY29Safe Dem
NC1Safe Dem
NC2Safe Dem
NC3Safe Rep
NC4Safe Dem
NC5Safe Rep
NC6Safe Rep
NC7Safe Dem
NC8Weak Dem
NC9Safe Rep
NC10Safe Rep
NC11Safe Dem
NC12Safe Dem
NC13Safe Dem
ND1Safe Dem
OH1Toss Up
OH2Safe Rep
OH3Safe Rep
OH4Safe Rep
OH5Safe Rep
OH6Safe Dem
OH7Strong Rep
OH8Safe Rep
OH9Safe Dem
OH10Safe Dem
OH11Safe Dem
OH12Safe Rep
OH13Safe Dem
OH14Strong Rep
OH15Safe Dem
OH16Safe Dem
OH17Safe Dem
OH18Strong Dem
OK1Safe Rep
OK2Safe Dem
OK3Safe Rep
OK4Safe Rep
OK5Safe Rep
OR1Safe Dem
OR2Safe Rep
OR3Safe Dem
OR4Safe Dem
OR5Safe Dem
PA1Safe Dem
PA2Safe Dem
PA3Strong Dem
PA4Safe Dem
PA5Safe Rep
PA6Safe Rep
PA7Safe Dem
PA8Strong Dem
PA9Safe Rep
PA10Safe Dem
PA11Strong Rep
PA12Toss Up
PA13Safe Dem
PA14Safe Dem
PA15Strong Rep
PA16Safe Rep
PA17Safe Dem
PA18Strong Rep
PA19Safe Rep
RI1Safe Dem
RI2Safe Dem
SC1Safe Rep
SC2Safe Rep
SC3Safe Rep
SC4Safe Rep
SC5Safe Dem
SC6Safe Dem
SD1Safe Dem
TN1Safe Rep
TN2Safe Rep
TN3Safe Rep
TN4Safe Dem
TN5Safe Dem
TN6Safe Dem
TN7Safe Rep
TN8Safe Dem
TN9Safe Dem
TX1Safe Rep
TX2Safe Rep
TX3Safe Rep
TX4Safe Rep
TX5Safe Rep
TX6Safe Rep
TX7Safe Rep
TX8Safe Rep
TX9Safe Dem
TX10Strong Rep
TX11Safe Rep
TX12Safe Rep
TX13Safe Rep
TX14Safe Rep
TX15Safe Dem
TX16Safe Dem
TX17Safe Dem
TX18Safe Dem
TX19Safe Rep
TX20Safe Dem
TX21Safe Rep
TX22Safe Rep
TX23Strong Dem
TX24Safe Rep
TX25Safe Dem
TX26Safe Rep
TX27Safe Dem
TX28Safe Dem
TX29Safe Dem
TX30Safe Dem
TX31Safe Rep
TX32Safe Rep
UT1Safe Rep
UT2Safe Dem
UT3Safe Rep
VT1Safe Dem
VA1Safe Rep
VA2Safe Rep
VA3Safe Dem
VA4Safe Rep
VA5Safe Rep
VA6Safe Rep
VA7Safe Rep
VA8Safe Dem
VA9Safe Dem
VA10Weak Rep
VA11Safe Dem
WA1Safe Dem
WA2Safe Dem
WA3Safe Dem
WA4Safe Rep
WA5Safe Rep
WA6Safe Dem
WA7Safe Dem
WA8Toss Up
WA9Safe Dem
WV1Safe Dem
WV2Safe Rep
WV3Safe Dem
WI1Safe Rep
WI2Safe Dem
WI3Safe Dem
WI4Safe Dem
WI5Safe Rep
WI6Safe Rep
WI7Safe Dem
WI8Safe Dem
WY1Weak Rep

Election Projection, Senate Version

The Senate races are finally starting to behave themselves, as there is now relatively little variance in how the next Senate could look.

Astoundingly, the closest the Democrats have come to losing a single Senate seat is Mary Landrieu in LA, whose lead is "only" 13.1 points (and those aren't all blue states on the top half either). They are picking up Virginia and New Mexico in landslides (VA Dem candidate Mark Warner gave that ever-so-inspiring keynote address about cellphone towers). Colorado and New Hampshire have also become safe, and it looks like Uncle Ted has run out of luck in Alaska.

In North Carolina, Bob Dole's wife no longer has a career after running "my opponent is an athiest" ads, and the race in Oregon is closing out as well.

Counting North Carolina and Oregon brings the Dems to 58 seats, and if I put my money on it, I'd say that's where they'll land. A good hedged bet is that with a 50% chance in MN and a 20% chance in Georgia, the Democrats have a 65% chance of picking up at least one of those seats. The polls are constantly back-and-forth in MN, but Al Franken has trailed the latest polls by SurveyUSA, Rasmussen, and Research 2000, all reputable and prolific pollsters. The Georgia race could flip on turnout, but if Jim Martin can't win a majority (which he can't) then it goes to runoff. Both sides will flood the race with money, but without the Obama turnout driving voters to the polls, I see little hope for picking up Georgia.

Final Senate Tally
Democrats and Liebermans: 58
Republicans: 42

And just in case you're worried about Lieberman, put it one of two ways: either you believe he really is a moderate Democrat who just supports the war and McCain, or you believe he is merely self-serving based on what gives him the best chance at power. Either way, he'll wear the Blue jersey next season.

Election Projection, Beta Version

(The numbers here are subject to change as the day goes on)

Yesterday Karl Rove spoke at Washington University. I wanted to go but didn't. But as I remarked to my friend, "How appropriate it would be to go see Karl Rove speak at the end of his era, and the next day vote in the dawn of the next era."

It's not news, but Barack Obama will become the 44th President of the United States.

There will be more polls so I won't call this my last update, though I may not have time for another. Here's the analysis.

I maintain that Barack Obama's core of 311 EVs (Kerry+IA+NM+CO+VA+NV+OH) is safe, even though Ohio has tightened a bit recently. I'd have to say I can't count McCain's core as being any larger than 132 EVs. It is unlikely that he will lose any of ND, GA, AZ, or MT, but the numbers just aren't there to call those EVs safe for McCain.

The remaining (non-safe) states are:
Florida (27)
North Carolina (15)
Missouri (11)
Indiana (11)
North Dakota (3)
Georgia (15)
Arizona (10)
Montana (3)

Florida - I would love to call Florida for Obama. It's just a whisper away, but I just can't do it. Four days ago it would have been all but locked up, but there has also been tightening here. Rasmussen, one of the best pollsters, went from Obama 51 McCain 47 on 10/26 to McCain 50 Obama 49 on 11/2. That's just one poll, but to really look for trends it's best to watch how numbers move within a pollster. Strong Obama.

North Carolina - More than any other state, North Carolina's result will be determined by turnout. There's apparently some rain there today, which is apparently bad for Democrats. I show Obama with a significant but very slight lead. The latest poll in NC is from American Research Group, whom I don't trust too much. The four polls before that show McCain ahead, albeit by 1, 1, 1, and 3 pts. Weak Obama.

Missouri - The show-me state has become the ultimate swing state. As I'm sure you've heard before, Missouri is (I believe) 25 for the last 26 elections in going with the winner (went against Eisenhower's re-election in '56) but this year runs a little redder than the median, though when Obama surged a month ago, Missouri moved bluer faster than most states. That trend has settled down, and of the last 6 polls in the state, there are four ties, one Obama 1 pt lead, and one McCain 1 pt lead. There are few areas in the country as poor as St. Louis City in running an election (in 2004 they had to extend voting hours to 10:00 PM from 7:00 PM) and the results always come in late, so MO will be among the later states called. I just don't know what to do with this state. Due to the confusion in the city, voter purges might be possible, but on the other hand I expect turnout to be very high. My precinct is largely African-American, and we were literally lined up by the hundreds before the polls even opened. My gut tells me Missouri might stay red, but all my objective indicators give an ever-so-slight advantage to Obama. (Very) Weak Obama.

Indiana - For all the talk of Indiana's historical red-ness, Bill Clinton only lost the state by 4 in '92 and 5.5 in '96. Popular Senator Evan Bayh was on the VP shortlist, and the state overperformed for Obama in the primaries. On the other hand, Obama's only led in 2 of the last 9 polls (in fairness, McCain only has in 4 but his leads have been larger) and the state never really shifted too far after the economic crisis. Since the state has been underpolled I tried turning down the sensitivity, but it still just shows a big swing state mess. I may very well come back to this one, but for now I'll say that the first indicator of the evening won't lead to a 6:30 concession speech. (Very) Weak McCain.

North Dakota - This state, part of the rural west, has suffered from a mighty dearth of polling. Indicators show it will be surprisingly close, but Obama withdrew from the state during the Palin bounce and he underperformed during the primaries. Weak McCain.

Georgia - Georgia, I feel, is just being a tease. The race there has tightened very dramatically, but McCain continues to average over 50% - a key threshold. While reports indicate that early voting turnout has been exceptionally high, Georgia would be an upset for the ages. Strong McCain.

Arizona - There are more undecideds in John McCain's home state than in Georgia, so McCain is not averaging 50% here even though his lead is about the same. But if you live in Arizona and haven't decided who you're voting for, I can't help but feel like that's not good for John McCain. Still, Obama's never led a poll here and underperformed during the primaries. Strong McCain.

Montana - This state has been a big tease for Dems all year. It also suffers from a dearth of polling; nonetheless, Obama's only lead in four months came from a university-comissioned poll, which are notoriously untrustworthy. Still, McCain isn't at 50% here either. One other issue is that Ron Paul has made the ballot in MT. Apparently I'm the only person in the country who thinks that this factor is likely to pull more votes from Obama than McCain, as Obama/Paul (now there's a ticket) shared the same young, energized voter demographics in the primaries (and their fundraising). As in North Dakota, Obama also pulled his resources here after the Palin bounce, which you may remember was particularly strong in the rural west. Strong McCain.

Final Analysis - I hate to call MO and IN one way or the other. The other states here could very easily be up for grabs, but also definitely have a lean. I'm really growing irritated by all these sites that use real statistics in their models, but then won't make any calls, or are very conservative. Who does it help to call 105 EVs "pure tossups" on the day of the election? Of course, I don't have much to risk if I'm wrong, but a four point lead on the basis of a weighted average of 30 polls in the last month is not a statistical tie.

Anyway, the way it's currently added up shows Obama 364, McCain 174 with Obama 353 McCain 185 and Obama 375 McCain 163 being the second- and third-most likely scenarios.

I project the popular vote to be Obama 53.1% to McCain 45.9%. Obama has currently led 278 consecutive polls in my model dating back to September 15. He is up 371-32 in the signs test and 15.8-0.0 in the weighted signs test. The polling averages are Obama 50.9% McCain 43.9%, which projected forward give you the bold numbers above.

The best guesses I have for state-by-state vote projections are given in the following table. I'm sorry it's messier than ever. There are no fudge factors in the following projections (i.e., I can't look at one state and say "hey, that should be 0.6 pts higher") but there is still subjectivity in terms of how sensitive the model is to new information (currently I give a poll a half-life of 5 days, down from 30 in June).

Note: I called Indiana above for McCain even though the math predicts (an insignificantly small) Obama victory, so my 364-174 differs from the graphic's 375-163.

Also, if you'd like a copy of my spreadsheet with all the data, I'd be happy to email it to you.

Updates are coming

I promise a full in-depth prediction thread, but I just got here, I'm three days behind in poll logging, and I might even have work to do. Noon eastern at the earliest.

experiences at the ballot box

So I know I had to wait in line for about 50 minutes this morning, but then my voting went smoothly. Waiting in line was quite enjoyable- it was clear the majority was in favor of Obama. Granted, I was voting in Bed-Sty and was one of maybe 4 other non-African Americans in the line. I learned that when the voting opened this morning, the line did indeed wrap around the block, though it was shorter upon my arrival.

How have your experiences been? Fortunately the voting machine did not break one person ahead of me like it did for the primaries.

I was very excited afterward; I paused to appreciate the magnitude of what I had just done. A stranger on the subway platform seemed to identify that we were having similar feelings and struck up a friendly conversation about the momentous occasion. How unusual!

Obama announced he would run on February 10, 2007. That's 19 months of campaigning. Everyone should pause as they cast their ballot- it's the end of a long journey, and as we are all glued to 538 or RCP or CNN throughout the day, let's hope it's the real beginning of...change we can believe in.

November 03, 2008

WSJ candidate statements

Below are links to two articles that ran in the WSJ this morning, one written by each of the presidential candidates. We all know the basic problems with each of the stump speeches, and they are not all removed from these articles, but I still enjoyed reading them, as the last-minute nature of the pleas changes the tone in an interesting way.

John McCain - "What We're Fighting For"
Barack Obama - "The Change We Need"

Pundit Predictions

via HuffPo:

Nate Silver
Winner: Obama
Electoral College: Obama 347 McCain 191
Senate Seats: 57 Democrats 41 Republicans
House Seats: 258 Democrats 177 Republicans

I could pick apart quite a few of these, but my favorite is probably Alex Castellanos, who would run with Geraldo on the mustache ticket, and thinks that Obama will win Florida and lose Ohio.  Either is possible, but no way both of those things happen (i.e., Ohio is bluer than Florida right now, so if Florida goes blue, so would Ohio.  Plus I already called Ohio the other day).  Bonus:  He calls Mary Landrieu's LA Senate seat for the Republicans, which is absolutely ridiculous in and of itself (Nate puts her at 98%) but he adds for fun that Georgia will go to the Democrats.  I'm dead serious - anyone who is that bad at his job should be relieved of it.

November 02, 2008

Rick Davis is on Fox News Sunday

"I think you can probably move Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada into McCain's column."

"John McCain is the greatest closer poltician of all time."

October 31, 2008

Perhaps the best description of a sunk cost ever

From Bill Simmons' latest article:

What is a sunk cost? In financial terms, it's a lost cause -- you're paying for something that has lost its value to you. Let's say I spent $200 on one of those beautiful, 6-foot-high, glass-blown water bongs and named it Barack Obonga. And let's say I smoked a little too much of the special hydro weed they give to cancer patients, decided someone was watching me through my front window, ran outside in my underwear with a baseball bat, and eventually spent the next two hours sitting in a tree waiting for the imaginary guy to come back before my neighbors called the police. And let's say the whole experience made me say, "You know what? I need to quit smoking pot, it's making me a little crazy." Maybe I'd try to sell the bong on Craigslist to no avail, and none of my friends would take it because there's nothing grosser than owning someone else's bong. At that specific point, Barack Obonga would become a sunk cost; that money is out the window. It's gone. I need to accept this fact and move on.

Sorry to spam ...

... but if you still aren't convinced of victory, read this article "10 reasons McCain might win." When you see how hard this guy is trying, you will know there's no chance.

My favorite is #6, where he claims that McCain taking Pennsylvania and Ohio means he wins the election. You guys hopefully know better by now.

Hey Bart, congratulations!

(Sorry guys, I had to pick somebody)

Is Arizona Close? (UPDATE)

Update: We have our first poll of the 2010 Senate race.

"If the 2010 election for U.S. Senate were held today for whom would you vote for if the choices were between [current governor] Janet Napolitano the Democrat and John McCain the Republican?"

Janet Napolitano - 53
John McCain - 45

**************************************************************

Arizona has tightened rather dramatically in the last four or five days. On 10/24 I showed McCain up by 17.5 and ranked as the 45th bluest state. By 10/29 it had closed to 6.2 and reached #35. This didn't raise too many alarms, because pollsters have largely seen AZ as a waste of time this cycle, so either result could have been an outlier based on a lack of good polling data. But with over a half dozen polls in the last week, and the state now at McCain +4.3, what is going on? The media of course loves this story because it shows Obama's dominance reaching so far as to hit McCain's home state. So I just wanted to clear things up.

You can see there was no polling for a while (between 9/29 and 10/18). Then all of the sudden this one poll came up showing McCain only up 2, and the pollsters invaded.

Well, here's chill-pill time. Even if I drop all the pre-10/18 polls, McCain is still up 3.75. And as we've already seen today, it would be difficult for me to call that a swing state. Obama's never led a poll here, he slightly underperformed in the primary, and he has no ground game of any kind in the state. I'd still call this one Safe McCain, but I'll keep an eye out.

Update: Interestingly, SurveyUSA has not polled AZ since 02/28. Of all pollsters with more than 10 polls this year (and they've probably put out around 150) they are the best-rated pollster on 538, so if they say anything interesting in the next day or two, I'll definitely drop a line.

Here's a sloppy screenshot:

Election day weather

In hopes of finding even more reasons to be excited for Tuesday night/Wednesday morning I decided to check the national weather forecast for Tuesday. Here is the Weather Underground map for mid-day Tuesday:


And here is the hilariously useless and patriotic map from AccuWeather:


In the end it seems as if weather won't be too much of a factor in terms of its impact on voter turnout. On the east coast there is not too much in the way of precipitation, but perhaps the Georgia senate race and the southernmost part of North Carolina will see unexpected voter patterns. Assuming Chris' predictions come true (especially Ohio) the weather on the west coast may be irrelevant, with its impact overwhelmed by the impact of the returns from the east coast.

So as it turns out this post says nothing. At least we now know that Earth has one more layer than previously known: a gigantic American flag that stretches north to south from Canada to Mexico and east to west from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Finally we know the true boundaries of manifest destiny. Thank you, AccuWeather.

I Call Ohio for Obama

This is a tough call. Ohio's a big prize - you don't want to blow that one.

In many ways this race seems close. It's currently Obama 48.9, McCain 44.8. Obama slightly underperformed Nate's model in the primaries.

But here's why I called it. I currently project Obama to win by 3.75 pts. That's a lot of ground to make up, and it's not like it's only a statistical fluke - it represents a weighted average of 83 polls, including 30 in October. What really did it for me was recent polling.

Obama hasn't trailed in a single non-partisan poll (there have been 14) since October 19. His latest leads are 4, 4, 9, 4, 7, 3, 5, 7, 11, and 10. It's tough to argue with those numbers, and tough for McCain to overcome them.

Obama will now be working from a core of 311 EVs on election night.

"Too Much Fear"

excerpts from Sophia Carroll's latest HuffPo piece...


Obama's speeches are vigorous and inspiring, but they lose significance when they are part of a bigger picture in which our democracy lacks serious debate. McCain's failure to make a serious case for his side has victimized the whole country because now, whoever wins this election won't have won because of ideas or vision, but because fewer people are worried about the threat he poses to our way of life.

Weight-loss strategy can be of use, here: to change an outcome, identify problem behavior. What is making us particularly vulnerable to fear today? Well, people on the left feel our democracy has been deliberately and systematically destabilized by the current president's consolidation of power to the executive branch, and we are all affected by his administration's insidious tendency to justify foreign policy in personal terms (implicitly the president's), rather than, say, the interests of the country as a whole. I'm not sure many would disagree that the president signifies far more today than he did eight years ago, and that this has been done deliberately. Scary.

Insisting that America show things like resolve and determination, for example, has re-located our national character away from where it belongs, with the people and into the person of the president. The truth is, wanting to show "strength" and "resolve" is no more relevant a justification for military action than the desire to show "happiness" would validate buying every Iraqi a balloon. If this bothers Americans even at a merely subconscious level, that's a good thing, because such personification evokes the exact system of government that our nation formed in order to reject: monarchy. If we're still uncomfortable with that, all is not lost.

But can a people remain democratic and self-reliant when its choices are dictated by fear? Democratic government's great advantage lies in its ability to express the will of the people, but can a people even have a 'will' under such conditions, other than to survive? [Katie-reaction: I'm not sure I 100% agree with this - I think most Americans-and many people for whom voting is a given - are still too rich to truly worry about "survival" - we're worried about keeping our stuff.] If so, it's barely appearing in the campaign coverage. We see voters on each side who are terrified that the opposition will destroy the country should he win, and other issues are all secondary, 'politics as usual.'

I am in the same boat, because I can't stop myself from fearing a McCain victory ... Both McCain and Palin seem unpredictable, undignified, and barely in control of any situation. These are not traits that characterize an America I want to live in, and much as I oppose our monarchic turn, this election does feel like a moment in time when our body politic is about to switch heads.

While Obama may be a good candidate for new 'head', we are a nation founded in pursuit of self-reliance, and as such, the position should not be available. Whoever wins, we must find a way to thrive under his administration without being ruled by it (I doubt Obama would disagree). It is precisely because democracies do not mistake the desires of their leaders for those of the people that we don't tend to start wars. America has begun blurring both lines, and we need to stop.

It is looking like the Democrats are going to do very well in this election, which may help: a bigger government would necessitate the spreading of power. But it will be at our nation's peril if the new, left-leaning leaders interpret their victory, as Bush did his narrow 2004 win, as a clear mandate to institute the kind of broad social changes that so many of us liberals would dearly love to see. They need to restore trust in our democracy first, and to do that they have to restore our trust in government itself by resisting the urge to treat legislation like a game of tetherball, forcing as much through as possible while they're in control.

If Obama and Biden win, after all, it will be because conservative Americans feel they cannot trust McCain with all that power, and not because they have had a sudden change of heart about the estate tax. While I may be writing this from a position of fear, I believe it: those conservatives are going to save this country by voting Obama, and they should not be thanked having their values ignored. To do so would be to ignore the national conversation that has been taking place over the past two years, and they deserve better.

We all deserve better, because all of America needs a government we can trust--not love, but trust, so that, for example, campaign promises to shrink and weaken the government seem as ludicrous as they would in any other job interview. Once we don't need to rely on the president to embody all that we stand for, we can focus on his job performance and evaluate him accordingly without getting swept away in persona.

Such scrutiny makes leaders better leaders, and it is why democracy works. I hope our leaders start working to earn back the public trust in the next few years, so that our next elections feel a little more democratic, and a lot less scary, to everyone.

Poll Closing Times



Note that the first polls close in Indiana at 6:00 PM eastern. If Obama wins Indiana you can call it right there. Polls close an hour later in Florida, Virginia, and (I guess) Georgia, which also would mean Grandpa McCain can go to bed early.

my weakness for cute kids is spilling over into this blog...


...but aaaaaw.


yeah, I'm done now, I promise.

The fourth paragraph is my favorite...


...finally, someone's gotten specific about this whole "change" thing...

my first time quoting a Whig...

"Passion and prejudice properly aroused and directed...do about as well as principle and reason in a party contest."

- Thomas Elder, Whig party politician, 1840

I Hate Election Campaign Post-Morterms. So Here's Mine.

Every cycle the election campaigns are completely overanalyzed, with everything the loser doing being labeled "idiotic" (though Kerry put together a losing campaign like fewer others could) and everything the winner did being "visionary." Look, campaigns are important, and it's important that both sides play well. But just like soccer, most of the game is a wash, except for a few huge plays. So why did John McCain lose? Here it is, in four easy steps:

1. George W. Bush
Barack Obama certainly deserves credit for associating McCain with Bush nonstop. It's a great move and where it's really helping is downticket, because it's just hurting the Republican party all over. But listen. What this factor is really all about is every time you said to yourself "how is this race so close?" If these two are running in 2000 (even if it is McCain 2.0) I see McCain with a slight advantage. But Bush is on the verge of being the least popular president ever, so the deck was stacked before the campaign even began.

2. Economic Meltdown
Democrats' best issue is the economy. Republicans' best issue is national security. Imagine if 9-11-01 had happened on 9-11-04? Bush may have carried every single state. Of course an economic crisis is less emotionally acute than a national security crisis, but in essence that's what we have here.

3. Sarah Palin
The first two factors are things John McCain simply couldn't control. But he did control his VP pick. Now, these things are always analyzed, and the losing canididate will always be scrutinized for his VP pick. But if McCain won you wouldn't see Joe Biden on this list. John McCain really blew it with this pick because he did not vet her and because she's not competent. All the other people on the list - Romney, Lieberman, Huckabee (not Pawlenty) were at least vetted and competent. So they might not have helped, but they couldn't have brought down the ticket. He violated the first rule: do no harm (Bart and Carly - you guys remember my endless VP emails). As I said the other day, (1) Obama deserved praise for keeping this in mind and resisting the Hillary temptation, and (2) I think the idea of appealing to the base is nonsense (unless there's reason to believe you will face significant third-party opposition). I need to stop because you can go for years about Sarah Palin, but there's one other important thing: when he picked her, he instantly lost all credibility with the words "Maverick" and "experience."

4. Wasted Time
Could you imagine if the Red Sox won an ALCS six days before the NLCS wrapped up, and they spent the in-between time partying? That's essentially what John McCain did. He more-or-less locked up the nomination in January. In the seven months until the RNC, the only thing he really did was put out an ad saying "Barack Obama is Paris Hilton." He sat by idly for months. And not knowing who the nominee would be was no excuse. He should have been distancing himself from George W. Bush and saying things like "Well, no surprise here. We don't know who the Democrats are going to nominate, but we do know it's going to be yet another tax-and-spend liberal."

And that's it. That's all there is to it. There were small things like McCain's age, or Obama's debate performances, or the recent line about "spreading the wealth" (which I would guess is actually pretty effective on the six undecided voters left), or Obama's poor response time on the energy issue, or McCain's poor resource allocation decisions, but none of them were game-changers like the four listed here.

October 30, 2008

Guess who the chubby black kid in the back row is

Also unrelated to most things...

But I know of at least 2 people who read this blog and appreciate Tracy Morgan's antics, so I recommend this NYT spotlight article.

And because it's the season, I must add Werewolf Bar Mitzvah for those who love it already, or those who have never seen it.

A little advice?

This is unrelated to, well, everything, but...

How do you guys cope when you feel there's a very real danger of you falling asleep at your desk?

A very strange book

I enjoyed reading these excerpts of Euonia, a new book in which each chapter contains only one of the vowels (though in each chapter the chosen vowel is used many times).

October 29, 2008

EV Report, 10/29/08

Not much to report, but I'll be out of the office Thursday and Monday, leaving only today, Friday, and Election Day for me to chip in the ol' two cents.


I added a column which is Obama's proportion in the weighted signs test. Again, my signs test is just how many polls each candidate has led in, straight up. The weighted signs test weights each poll by pollster and date, so newer better polls count more. It actually passes a common sense test for the probability of an Obama victory in nearly all states.

As reported earlier, NV finally meandered over to the safe column. Missouri and North Carolina definitely lean Obama but aren't locked up. And I still hate you Indiana.

Actually, the third column may not have been there earlier. That's the sum of the poll weights in a state. The higher the number, the higher the level of good, recent polling in the state.

Really, Mississippi?

Just stumbled upon (not StumbleUpon-ed) this tidbit of electoral history:

1948 Presidential Election

National:
Harry S Truman (Dem) - 24,179,347 - 49.6%
Thomas E. Dewey (Rep) - 21,991,292 - 45.1%
Strom Thurmond (Dixie) - 1,175,930 - 2.4%

Mississippi:
Harry S Truman - 19,384 - 10.1%
Thomas E. Dewey - 5,043 - 2.6%
Strom Thurmond - 167,538 - 87.2%

Notes, Votes, and Quotes

I really enjoyed scanning through this Congressional Quarterly summary of the positions of McCain and Obama.

When he thought it could get no worse

I moved Nevada into the Safe column today, on the basis of Obama being up by an average of 7 pts in the five polls from the last week.

Now, normally a state with only 5 EVs and claims to fame like "Burning Man" and "Britney Spears' other wedding" doesn't top the list of newsmakers, but here's the thing.

I'm not ready to include Nevada in the core of 286, but adding Nevada to it gives you 291 safe EVs. Which means that even if John McCain's hail mary for Pennsylvania's 21 EVs works, he would still only reduce Obama to 270 EVs.

Five days ago I stated that if I were a McCain supporter, the news that day would be what made me give up. Today, if I were on McCain's staff, this is the news that would make me give up.

PS - It's still 364-163 with ever-so-stubborn Indiana still as a coin-flip tossup, where's it's been all year. Please Indiana, just pick a side.

Trouble in the land of peaches?

Georgia is still definitely on the McCain side of the ledger, but he can't be too excited when he sees stuff like this.

October 28, 2008

That's Not Debate, That's More of the Same!

If you liked watching Sarah Palin's RNC speech mashup, you'll probably enjoy watching this debate synchronization.

Let Me Be Clearer (Updated)

Earlier (over on the right) I updated my Senate projections, claiming that Democrats' easiest road to 60 seats would run through tough races in either GA, KY, or MS. Well, I was wrong.

The easiest way to 60 seats is actually to have Barack Obama appoint Republican senators from states with Democratic governors to his cabinet. He gets to claim bipartisanship, they actually get to do something other than filibuster, and Democrats gain a Senate seat.

UPDATE: Two polls today, one from a reputable pollster, show Wicker (R) up by 11 and 13 in Mississippi. Oh, well.

I'm Sure You've Seen Some Variant Of This

... but it's still funny.

Dear Red States,

We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. It may even include Florida and Ohio, they are seriously considering it. We've given them until Nov. 4th to decide. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country. Since we're dropping the middle states we're calling it United America, or simply the U.A.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. You can take Ted Nugent. We're keeping Bruce Springsteen and Billy Joel. You get WorldCom. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get Ole' Miss. We get Harvard and 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms, and the highest concentration of pregnant unwed teenagers. Please be aware that the U.A. will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, really we do, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire. We'd rather spend it on taking care of sick people, and educating our children.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines, 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living Redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the war, the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy Redies believe you are people with higher morals then we Bluies..


I can't really discuss the rest of the email, but it had to with certain types of vegetation, and how the red states will now have to revert to Mexico for their supply.

Intrade: Make Money on Reason over Emotion

That Barack Obama is trading so low on Intrade befuddles me. Yes, befuddles.

Now, much has been written about the fallability of prediction markets so I won't even go there. But here's my guess: if you really, truly, deeply want John McCain to win this election, it's got to be pretty tough to put your money down against him. You trick yourself. The Bradley Effect is going to make a comeback, you say. Undecideds have broken strongly against Obama before, like in the New Hampshire primary, you convince yourself. The last two times Virginia went blue were for LBJ and Harry Truman; there's no way it'll flip this year you tell yourself. (By the way, I'm not immune to this. In 2004 there were three states I couldn't decide how to call - Iowa, New Mexico, and Ohio. I was 48 for 48 by midnight on election night. The next morning I was 48 for 51, because I just couldn't get myself to believe that they'd actually pull the lever for Bush, and I incorrectly called all three for Kerry.)

But look at the facts. Let's take Virginia. Barack Obama has led every poll in October - a streak of 18 consecutive. I project his lead to be nearly 7 pts. Nate Silver says 96% chance Obama wins it. Even the networks have moved the Old Dominion out of the tossup section. Yet you can still buy an Obama contract - today - for $82 (provided you're not American).

Hell, you can still buy a Pennsylvania contract for 86. 86! McCain hasn't led a poll in Pennsylvania since April! April for God's sake. Stick $86 in now, get $100 in a week (we'll call it $99 after fees to be conservative) and you've earned an effective annual return of 151,000%. On Virginia - 1,800,000%. This is ridiculous. I can't play on Intrade because I'm an American, but if I only could ...

As an aside I just noticed that Intrade now has options contracts? Holy cow that's cool. I gotta find a way to get around these regulations.
I love Tuesdays' Science Times.

I love academic/scholarly discussions about sex.

I enjoyed this quote: "“Is it that men are bragging about it and women are lying to everybody including themselves?” Dr. Fisher asked. “Men want to think women don’t cheat, and women want men to think they don’t cheat, and therefore the sexes have been playing a little psychological game with each other.”"

Not exactly a high brow scholarly discussion of sex, but an interesting read. The article notes we may be cheating more- whether physically or emotionally- because of the facility with which we can "communicate" today. It's funny- cell phones and email and chat supposedly inhibit sincere connections and relationships yet facilitate something like cheating, which can often be categorized as simply reaching out to forge a superficial relationship, often devoid of real emotion but nonetheless providing an intimate connection. The relationship between technology, communications/relations, and infidelity is indeed dynamic.

October 27, 2008

The Economist.com's cool section

The economist host an online formal structured debate on some interesting topics. Link

Christopher Buckley goes 2-for-2

I always liked reading William Buckley even though I disagreed with him. I won't make the mistake of confusing the two, but so far I like Christopher Buckley as well. And here's his first two articles for the Daily Beast.

Sorry, Dad, I'm voting for Obama
Rush, you’re no William F. Buckley, Jr.

Darcy Burner for Congress, indeed

Darcy Burner (D) is trying to unseat two-term Congressman Dave Reichert in what is possibly the closest House race of the year. So there I am on TerraPass's website looking into getting my office to buy carbon offsets, and right there on their list of partners is "Darcy Burner for Congress," which has apparently offset 19 metric tons of carbon. Good job, Darcy!

Taking the Gloves Off

From Investor's Business Daily, 10/14
(Don't worry; all their other cartoons are sharply anti-Obama)


General Update

I could have cleaned this up a little better, but oh well.

Click on the image for better viewing.

Public Service Announcement

If you have devices that automatically adjust for daylight savings time, make sure they haven't already adjusted this weekend and are set to adjust next weekend instead.  I know we have one employee who was late this morning because of an auto-adjusting clock.

October 25, 2008

Are You Kidding Me?!

OK, so this isn't her fault, but I can still be angry.

Last night Sarah Palin dropped a ceremonial first puck at an NHL game for the second time. After getting the usual treatment from the ever-unfriendly crowd in Philadelphia two weeks ago, this time she found herself in much friendlier St. Louis, where the Blues were hosting the Kings.

Unfortunately, as the Blues' all-star goaltender Manny Legace (pronounced legacy) stepped out onto the ice before the game, an official accidentally shifted the carpet laid out for Governor Palin and Legace fell, resulting in a minor hip injury.

Legace is out tonight, but the Blues are up 3-0 in the waning moments of the second period. He should be back for next Thursday's game against the poorly-named Carolina Hurricanes. Nevertheless, Sarah Palin continues to ruin everything she's associated with.

UPDATE: Five minutes into the third period, and just over four periods into his career (and on the way to a shutout in his first career start), Blues backup Ben Bishop has left the game with an injury. Fan-freakin'-tastic.

What if the whole world could vote in the USA election?

The Economist posted an interesting applet that shows how each country of the world is leaning in the upcoming election.

PoliticsHome Presidential Jury Panel

I'm not exactly sure what this is going to turn out to be, but I'm gonna give it a shot.  It'll be a ten-minute survey each week evaluating the new president.  Just passing the word.

October 24, 2008

I'm leaving, but ...

I just wanted to say real quick: doesn't Bloomberg's battle for a third-term end any hopes he has of the presidency, and perhaps governor and other such offices. I can't imagine a presidential opponent wouldn't make this power grab a huge issue. But I'm outta here.

Weekend Update: 11 Days to Go

(My 100th post)

Click on the image to view full size.

The reason Indiana seems out of place is that its polling has been quite erratic, I've heard little about Obama's ground game there, and it's polling strength is the weakest of any state on the list from Missouri to North Carolina.

Actually, interestingly NV, MO, and IN are nearly identical in their polling strength, which is far weaker than that of OH, FL, and NC, which are also nearly identical.

I have two October polls for North Dakota and nineteen for North Carolina.

Grammar Time

"After nearly two years of a grueling and ugly campaign, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois has proved that he is the right choice to be the 44th president of the United States."

-New York Times

OK, so basically my understanding was that you can say "Barack Obama proved ..." or "Barack Obama has proven," but not "has proved." Am I crazy?

(Side note: I want to have a discussion about quotation marks and commas sometime)

Also, now that I've been staring at the word 'proven' for the last two minutes, my brain is now quite sure I can't possibly be spelling it right. Really stare at that and try to convince yourself it's pronounced the way it is (then again, maybe it's just the font that is used when you create a post).

*************************

Here's another question, one on which I'm sure I'll run into some opposition. So, the conventional wisdom is that if you're discussing a noun that begins with a vowel, you precede it with "an" as opposed to "a," as in "an obligation."

But my understanding is that whether it begins with a vowel is irrelevant; it's whether it begins with a vowel sound. I guess this distinction isn't directly important to my point, which was going to be that I can't stand hearing the phrase "an historical," as in, "from an historical perspective."

Perhaps if you live in England, where "I have to hunt to be happy" turns into "I 'ave to 'unt to be 'appy" you could say an historical, but otherwise, my understanding is it's just plain wrong. Nonetheless, it's something I hear very well-educated people say on a regular basis, so again, maybe I'm missing something. Thoughts?

I'm reverting some of the changes (UPDATED)

I just don't like them, and the "reactions" don't seem to be working anyhow. Feel free to tinker with anything you'd like though.

Update:
Did you know when creating a post, if you hit the "show all" button after the line where you enter labels it will show you all the labels used thus far? 'Cuz I didn't.

I know, I know, I shouldn't let this stuff bother me...

During last night's NBC News interview with Brian Williams:

WILLIAMS: Who is a member of the elite?

PALIN: Oh, I guess just people who think that they're better than anyone else. And-- John McCain and I are so committed to serving every American. Hard-working, middle-class Americans who are so desiring of this economy getting put back on the right track. And winning these wars. And America's starting to reach her potential. And that is opportunity and hope provided everyone equally. So anyone who thinks that they are-- I guess-- better than anyone else, that's-- that's my definition of elitism.

WILLIAMS: So it's not education? It's not income-based? It's--

PALIN: Anyone who thinks that they're better than someone else.

WILLIAMS: --a state of mind? It's not geography?

PALIN: 'Course not.

WILLIAMS: Senator?

MCCAIN: I-- I know where a lot of 'em live. (LAUGH)

WILLIAMS: Where's that?

MCCAIN: Well, in our nation's capital and New York City. I've seen it. I've lived there. I know the town. I know-- I know what a lot of these elitists are. The ones that she never went to a cocktail party with in Georgetown. I'll be very frank with you. Who think that they can dictate what they believe to America rather than let Americans decide for themselves.

*

Firstly: Fuck you, John.

Secondly: Sounds like the 9/11 terrorists really screwed up attacking the two outposts of "fake America," huh? We probably shouldn't have even bothered picking up the pieces downtown, as the centers of this country's government and finance clearly don't matter as much as off-the-radar mining towns.

Thirdly: I don't know anyone in New York or DC who wants to "dictate what they believe to America rather than let Americans decide for themselves." In fact, I think that most of us would rather McCain, Palin and their friends kept what they believe about our bodies, our significant others, and our money to themselves and let us decide for ourselves.

Fourthly: Does anyone work at that campaign? Is elitism geographic or not? Get your stories straight.

Let Me Be Very Clear: This Election Is Over (UPDATED)

(Addition is at the bottom)

There are a lot of people making a lot of predictions about this election. What gives me more clout than everybody else? Nothing. But hey, I am the only kid you know tracking this stuff on a spreadsheet everyday.

McCain got his ass kicked yesterday. Excuse the French, but if I were a McCain supporter, yesterday is the day I would have finally admitted to myself that there is no chance.

The University of Wisconsin, whose track record gives me nothing to worry about (a month ago they had Obama up by 1 in WI and tied in MN) showed Obama with big leads, which I've listed here, followed by Kerry's margin of victory in 2004:

StateObamaKerry
Iowa13-1
Illinois3010
Indiana10-21
Michigan223
Minnesota194
Ohio12-2
Pennsylvania103
Wisconsin121

These numbers are huge. It's an average increase of 16 pts over Bush's numbers. You know how close the 2004 election was, and in that election huge states like Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan all came down to the wire, though they all went for Kerry (plus Ohio, which went for Bush). To see those Kerry states not even be a worry is great for peace of mind, but better for campaign spending allocations. McCain pulling out of Michigan meant he was free to spend money on other states, but it also meant Obama was free to spend money on other states, too. But now I'm rambling; let's get back to the point.

Obama's core of 286 is still intact, with Colorado (Obama +5.3) remaining the closest state in the set. With leads of >2 pts, Obama has all but locked up Ohio, Nevada, and North Carolina. Missouri and Indiana also give him leads of more than 2 points but have seen less polling, and Florida is just a whisper away. This all adds up to 375 EVs.

I list 160 of McCain's 163 EVs as safe, with an epic Obama ground game possibly giving him a shot at North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, or West Virginia. But Obama pulled most of his resources out of the first three a while back, and never really invested in West Virginia.

I'd say of the 375 EVs listed above, Indiana is Obama's toughest battle. But make no mistake, he's got 364 all but locked up. I'd estimate he does finish at 375, but it's still a little early for exact predicitons.

***********************************************

So, that means Obama's going to win in a landslide, right? Well, depends how you define landslide. It turns out that, looking at elections from a historical perspective, close elections are the exception and not the rule. Bush failed to win 300 EVs twice. Going back, the last times that happened were Jimmy Carter (1976), Woodrow Wilson (1916), and William McKinley (1900) - when there were only 447 total EVs.

So for reference, here's a list of electoral vote totals from past elections:

YearPresident EVsOut Of
1788George Washington 6969
1792George Washington 132132
1796John Adams 71139
1800Thomas Jefferson 73138
1804Thomas Jefferson 162176
1808James Madison 122175
1812James Madison 128217
1816James Monroe 183217
1820James Monroe 228231
1824John Quincy Adams 84261
1828Andrew Jackson 178261
1832Andrew Jackson 219286
1836Martin Van Buren 170294
1840William Henry Harrison 234294
1844James K. Polk 170275
1848Zachary Taylor 163290
1852Franklin Pierce 254296
1856James Buchanan 174296
1860Abraham Lincoln 180303
1864Abraham Lincoln 212233
1868Ulysses S. Grant 217294
1872Ulysses S. Grant 286352
1876Rutherford B. Hayes 185369
1880James A. Garfield 214369
1884Grover Cleveland 219401
1888Benjamin Harrison 233401
1892Grover Cleveland277444
1896William McKinley 271447
1900William McKinley 292447
1904Theodore Roosevelt 336476
1908William Howard Taft 321483
1912Woodrow Wilson 438531
1916Woodrow Wilson 277531
1920Warren G. Harding 404531
1924Calvin Coolidge 382531
1928Herbert Hoover 444531
1932Franklin D. Roosevelt 472531
1936Franklin D. Roosevelt 523531
1940Franklin D. Roosevelt 449531
1944Franklin D. Roosevelt 432531
1948Harry S. Truman 303531
1952Dwight D. Eisenhower 442531
1956Dwight D. Eisenhower 457531
1960John F. Kennedy 303537
1964Lyndon B. Johnson 486538
1968Richard Nixon 301538
1972Richard Nixon 520538
1976Jimmy Carter 297538
1980Ronald Reagan 489538
1984Ronald Reagan 525538
1988George H. W. Bush 426538
1992Bill Clinton 370538
1996Bill Clinton 379538
2000George W. Bush 271538
2004George W. Bush 286538

Update:
In 1824 John Quincy Adams became president even though Andrew Jackson received more popular votes and more electoral votes.

In 1876 Rutherford B. Hayes won the presidency even though his opponent Samuel J. Tilden received a majority of the popular vote.

In 1888 Benjamin Harrison ended Grover Cleveland's bid for re-election even though Cleveland won a plurality of the popular vote. Cleveland of course won his third bid for the presidency in the following election, making him the second of three presidents to win a plurality of the national popular vote three times (after Andrew Jackson, before Franklin Roosevelt).

In 2000 - well, let's just not go there.

October 23, 2008

you guys may have already seen or read about this - it was a little while ago - but it's great speech by labor leader and former AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka about Obama, race, and labor unions. Trumka's a really fascinating guy anyway...

http://blip.tv/file/1327725

October 22, 2008

Breaking News: MN-06

(If nothing special happens, then the title of this post is a link to the story in question)

McCarthy-wannabe Michele Bachmann just got the smackdown from the GOP. Even though she is ahead in a non-safe race, they've pulled all their ad money from her. I doubt they want her to lose so much as want to distance themselves from her, but even then. Wow. Never heard of this before.

Why McCain Will Lose

I mean, seriously. Just look at those last three pictures.

New Features

I'm playing around with "Blogger in Draft," so if you see some new features or something that looks funky, don't worry. Feel free to play around with it yourself.

Update: The "reactions" thing would be a cool idea if you could change it on a post-by-post basis.

Where Do You Get Your News?

I've got a variety of reasons for asking, but I'm looking to improve on my news sources a bit. There's the political ones, and typically I used Yahoo for general news because it was sufficient without doing anything wrong. Well now it's ugly as hell, and I'd like some help.

Here, I'll start. I tend to mostly go to RCP, HuffPo, and Drudge. A few others here and there, but that's the bulk of it (mostly because of the election).

pretty cool


courtesy of 30reasons.org

McCain's Best Strategy

Look, let's face it. John McCain is starting down the barrel of an electoral gun. You're his campaign manager. What are you going to do?

First of all, for two months McCain should have been making sure that America knew it was McCain-Palin against Obama-Wright. Or Wright-Obama. Take your pick.

But beyond that, it's clear now that the Sarah Palin pick is disastrous. She's now quite unpopular and, at $150,000, rather expensive. C'mon Maverick, grow some nads. Drop Sarah Palin.

Now, unfortunately the religious extremist joining McCain on the ticket has really excited the base. Were it a month ago McCain could go back and pick Lieberman or Ridge and still pass Electoral Politics 101. But it's not a month ago.

However, something happened in the last month: an epic economic meltdown. If only there was a VP candidate who frames himself as strong on the economy and a staunch conservative. I know it's brash; I know it's extreme. But John McCain has no options left. Mitt Romney for Vice President.

That's all I've got.

It's Over: Poll Shows Obama Up By 8 Points ...

... on family values!!!

October 21, 2008

Warren: We're not all that bad

It's been a long campaign, and there is little doubt that the enthusiasm for Obama's campaign is unprecedented in history. Nonetheless, it is Missouri that is solely responsible for record turnout at Obama's rallies, as his 100,000 spectators in St. Louis and 75,000 in Kansas City this past Saturday were a one-day record for his campaign.

And although there was some earlier worry that perhaps there's something wrong with the Show-Me State (if you think about it, it's not that bad of a nickname, really), I'd also like to add that Missouri's polling average has leapfrogged that of nearly every other swing state, and now Obama's lead puts Missouri first in line to be the next "Safe Obama" state.

I mean, seriously. Look how many freakin' people there are:
(And by the way, that's the arch on the right in the top picture)



Because You Should Re-Read It On Occasion

Hey, the first paragraph no longer ends by saying Obama would be the first "affirmative action president"!

Barack Obama - Conservapedia

What the Hell is the McCain Campaign Doing?

I refer you to the chart I posted yesterday. Now, if you start at the bottom and go up, McCain has to get every state up to and including Colorado to win this election (never heard that before ...).

So here's his new strategy. He does have the wisdom and foresight to abandon New Mexico and, yes, Iowa. Believe it or not, Mr. "I'm gonna give you a little straight talk - I oppose ethanol subsidies" McCain isn't going to win Iowa.

I'm sorry. But really?! You guys really figured that out? You're down 12.3 pts as of yesterday, and out of 28 polls in the state, you've been losing in 27 and tied in 1. Why the hell has that campaign spent a single dollar since September in Iowa?

OK, so congratulations, they've finally seen the light. They're abandoning Iowa, New Mexico, and Colorado. Wait, what?! Yes folks, the McCain campaign is giving up on Colorado.

Now let's look at our chart. If McCain wins all the states up to but not including Colorado, he of course falls short, with 265 EVs. So he's got to pick them up somewhere right?

So, his strategy is (say it quickly in your head), while defending Virginia, Missouri, Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, North Dakota, West Virginia, Montana, and Georgia, to make a play for Pennsylvania.

I'm sorry for my tone this morning, but I can't for the life of me understand what the hell they're thinking! If I were a Republican I'd be writing things right here that would certainly get me fired from my job. This is much worse than watching Kerry lie down and take those Swift Boat attacks. I mean, I guess they're looking at electoral votes, but come on! If you're going after a state where you're down 9 points why not go all out? You're down 18 in California ... twice the deficit, but more than twice the electoral votes, right?

The bottom line is that in many ways I would have been a better strategist than these loons. McCain took months to try to frame Obama, and finally the best he did was Paris Hilton. He failed Electoral Politics 101 when, after correctly pandering to the right during the primary, he incorrectly continued to pander to the right during the general, the pinnacle of which was one of the most disastrous VP choices in electoral history. With Palin, he failed rule no. 1: Do No Harm. Obama resisted the temptation to choose Hillary because his guys understood rule number one. McCain proceeded to fail on the bailout and fail on the "suspension of his campaign." Finally, he failed in trying to connect Obama to his shady associations, by choosing the third best guy to attack him with (really - you choose Bill Ayers over Rev. Wright and Tony Rezko?). This campaign is over. And even now, as we sit at about 364-174 or so, I still can't help but wonder - why is this election so close?

October 20, 2008

Plumbing

The New House Race of Interest (Updated)

"What I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out if they are pro-America or anti-American."

--Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06)


Freshman Congresswomen Michele Bachmann has turned on the overdrive (unfortunately, not my line) and gotten herself into trouble for calling for McCarthy-esque investigations into the patriotism of members of Congress. I'll now be watching her election race very closely. Here's a polling summary up to today, but look for plenty of polls in the near future now:

Public Opinion Strategies (R) - 10/13 - Tinklenberg 33, Bachmann 44
Grove Insight (D) - 10/11 - Tinklenberg 38, Bachmann 42
Grove Insight (D) - 08/20 - Tinklenberg 27, Bachmann 40

Unfortunately all three polls so far are partisan, so it's hard to tell what's going on, although even the Dem polls show Bachmann ahead. My average gives Bachmann a 9-pt lead.

Update:
"When Sarah Palin, herself no stranger to the most vile kind of mudslinging, says that your attacks are beyond the pale, I think you've officially crossed the line by any objective standard."
--Swing State Project

Idiotic Quote of the Day

"Secretary Powell says his endorsement is not about race... OK, fine. I am now researching his past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal, white candidates he has endorsed. I'll let you know what I come up with."

--Rush Limbaugh, 10/19/08