mrfrog, the consensus of the polls according to electoral-vote.com actually under-estimated Obama's performance in 2008, projecting 353EV when he actually got 365EV: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Nov04.html
More specifically, it forecast that Obama would lose IN and NE-2 and then he actually won them.

10/31/2012 2:14:01 PM

does anyone ever really win NE?

10/31/2012 2:18:44 PM

Quote :

"you're looking at the wrong question for ss/medicare"

No I'm not. 87% + people think it's been good for the country. That's a direct poll response. That would make them pro- ss/medicare. How to reform it is another question altogether, and has no relevance onto whether or not people support it as a whole.

Quote :

"plus, if its 50% pro gay marriage and 50% anti-war, those 50% do not necessarily overlap."

I never said they did. But, fyi, the pro gay marriage numbers have shot up drastically in the past few years, and show little sign of going in the other direction. Yet the political fervor against it continues to rise.

Quote :

"your mistake is assuming that being "pro-social security" means being pro your personal preference for fixing social security. thats not the case"

Nope. You're ascribing that to me. All I did was say that people support it, which they do (as evidenced by the polls) overwhelmingly so. I never even said what my personal preference on it was.

Quote :

"tl;dr: the country is split on how to fix medicare/ss, still split on social issues, and those who may poll for one thing may not be for another. This is why there are still multiple candidate viewpoints and why "wow everyone is so progressive!!!" is a silly statement."

I never said that. I said they support ss/medicare. You shifted my initial statement and then argued against it. I said that the country is surprisingly progressive, which is true when you compare that with limited discourse that exists in washington.



[Edited on October 31, 2012 at 2:34 PM. Reason : ]

10/31/2012 2:33:30 PM

Quote :

"Medicare: 88% of people say it has been good for the country http://www.people-press.org/2011/07/07/section-3-views-of-medicare/ Social Security: 87% of people say it has been good for the country http://www.people-press.org/2011/07/07/section-5-views-of-social-security/"

People will think the programs are great as long as the benefits are still flowing while the consequences, realized or not, are obfuscated. When many of the victims are not of voting age or even born yet, it's easy for these "social safety nets" to be popular. That's the entire point of government debt; you give people something for nothing. You give them education, health care, or anything else they need to live at no immediate cost, but it all has to be paid back with interest.

If any of this stuff was sold to the public in an honest way, I'd be more okay with it. We're going to war, you get free health care, you get free college, public workers get a fat pension - but you're going to pay higher taxes for each and every program we give you. We'll see how popular these big projects are under a system like that.

10/31/2012 3:00:18 PM

Quote :

"No I'm not. 87% + people think it's been good for the country. That's a direct poll response"

this question is completely irrelevent.

its like "do you think free icecream is good?"

of course most poeple are gonna think free shit is good. Then when you ask the actually important questions "how are we going to pay for the free icecream?" or "what flavors of icecream should be covered?" then you get the split that you observe in politics. ex: cutting benefits, raising taxes, privatization, etc... Those are the issues people campaign on, not "should ss/medicare exist?"

Quote :

"I never said they did. But, fyi, the pro gay marriage numbers have shot up drastically in the past few years, and show little sign of going in the other direction. Yet the political fervor against it continues to rise."

right. the country is still very split. the us is still not very progressive on this issue (although that is changing) and it is reflected in the political split.

Quote :

"I said that the country is surprisingly progressive, which is true when you compare that with limited discourse that exists in washington."

no its not. washington reflects the poll questions exactly. the candidates campaign on how to change medicare/ss not whether to support or abolish it. there is a very clear party line split on social issues like gay marriage that reflects the polling data.

the failiure of the political process in washington is not some conspiracy against the people. its a failure of democracy. the people are getting the representitives they deserve (garbage in garbage out)

10/31/2012 3:39:46 PM

Quote :

"mrfrog, the consensus of the polls according to electoral-vote.com actually under-estimated Obama's performance in 2008, projecting 353EV when he actually got 365EV: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Nov04.html More specifically, it forecast that Obama would lose IN and NE-2 and then he actually won them."

So your source says something different than mine. I'll be honest, I have no way to figure out what polls in 2008 used to say. I validly had a hard time googling for the information. Certainly, this diminishes the case for the Bradley effect.

Nonetheless, it seems like no one can figure out what metrics are right. When people disagree on a number it's more than just a statistical variation, it's a much stronger form of not knowing. Reading this thread, I don't get any decent prediction of the outcome.

10/31/2012 3:42:11 PM

Quote :

"Nonetheless, it seems like no one can figure out what metrics are right. When people disagree on a number it's more than just a statistical variation, it's a much stronger form of not knowing. Reading this thread, I don't get any decent prediction of the outcome."

10/31/2012 3:55:25 PM

I voted at the downtown location today. In and out in less than five minutes (that's what she said).

10/31/2012 4:05:51 PM

Now ppl are rumoring that unemployment may fall even more than the last report.
http://behavioraleconomy.gallup.com/2012/10/octobers-unemployment-rate-may-fall.html#.UJGIvDeTBwU.twitter

Quote :

"Now, Gallup Daily tracking data suggest the government could report another decline in October, as opposed to the consensus forecast for a slight increase to 7.9%. Gallup’s adjusted unemployment rate fell to 7.5% in October based on more than 30,000 monthly interviews completed through 30 days ending Oct. 28. "

10/31/2012 4:34:41 PM

It's probably too late to matter now.

Why fuel the conspiracy theorists that think the numbers are being "cooked?"

On the other hand I'd rather just see the report.

10/31/2012 4:38:03 PM

I dont get why Obama never used the fact that unemployment has been on a nose dive since the recession and just thrown it in Romney's face when he started complaining about the debt. Is it because that would have likely backfired on him?



[Edited on October 31, 2012 at 4:47 PM. Reason : simplufyed]

10/31/2012 4:46:45 PM

You obviously have to be very careful about what you throw in Romney's face.

Things that might be worth bragging about sometimes must be overlooked in order to minimize your opponent's talking points.

Romney could easily counter with:

The number of months previously above 8%.
The number of people in millions still unemployed.
The number on food stamps.
His line about fewer jobs created in September than August, fewer in August than July.
Incomes down $4300.
"If the same number of people were participating in the workforce as on the day he was elected, the number would actually be 11%."

In other words, sure, kudos to Obama. Unfortunately it lets Romney talk too much, so he's very careful using it. You think his caution is costing him?

10/31/2012 4:55:40 PM

10/31/2012 4:59:55 PM

^^ Well, I certainly think that it may have hurt him to just let Mitt paint this picture that the economy is going to hell when it actually has been on a very steady rebound, and better off than when he took office. He basically just let Romney say whatever and then countered with "your tax plan doesn't add up". He should have crafted it a little differently is all that I am saying.

10/31/2012 5:17:38 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pro-romney-group-to-air-3-million-ad-campaign-in-pennsylvania/2012/10/31/07bafc8e-2388-11e2-92f8-7f9c4daf276a_story.html

Team Romney is dumping 3 million on ads in Pennsylvania.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html#polls

All the Real Clear Politics polls from this month:

Quote :

"Franklin & Marshall 10/23 - 10/28 547 LV 4.2 49 45 Obama +4 Philadelphia Inquirer 10/23 - 10/25 600 LV 4.0 49 43 Obama +6 Rasmussen Reports 10/24 - 10/24 500 LV 4.5 51 46 Obama +5 Gravis Marketing 10/21 - 10/21 887 LV 3.3 48 45 Obama +3 Morning Call 10/17 - 10/21 444 LV 5.0 50 45 Obama +5 Quinnipiac 10/12 - 10/14 1519 LV 2.5 50 46 Obama +4 PPP (D) 10/12 - 10/14 500 LV 4.4 51 44 Obama +7 Morning Call 10/10 - 10/14 438 LV 5.0 49 45 Obama +4 Rasmussen Reports 10/9 - 10/9 500 LV 4.5 51 46 Obama +5 Philadelphia Inquirer 10/4 - 10/8 600 LV 4.0 50 42 Obama +8 Susquehanna 10/4 - 10/6 725 LV 3.7 47 45 Obama +2 Siena 10/1 - 10/5 545 LV 4.2 43 40 Obama +3"

Seems too little too late to shift PA, especially since the last minute photo ID law was blocked by the courts. Well maybe not too little, that's a lot of money, but with less than week until the election it seems like that money would be better spent on get out the vote in Ohio than TV ads in PA.

10/31/2012 5:27:32 PM

I wonder if anything like that has ever happened before. That would be a huge last minute shift.

10/31/2012 5:45:10 PM

Yeah, this is exactly what McCain did when the writing was on the wall late in the election. Pennsylvania was called the moment the polls closed. The same thing will happen this year. Romney is just trying to keep up appearances at this point.

10/31/2012 5:45:11 PM

Jill Stein got arrested again.

10/31/2012 6:31:26 PM

.

10/31/2012 6:37:04 PM

Axelrod bet his mustache on 3 states.

Michigan, Minnesota, and Pennsylvania.

Virginia too, but not sure if it's part of the bet.

10/31/2012 6:51:51 PM

Joe Scarborough will grow one if the president wins North Carolina and/or Florida.

10/31/2012 7:01:11 PM

Quote :

"Romney is just trying to keep up appearances at this point."

In all honesty, IF that is his strategy, how is that not just a giant waste of money?

What I am asking, more specifically, is that is this a strategy where he is hoping that dumping more money into PA may convince others that his momentum is catching on in other "blue" states?



[Edited on October 31, 2012 at 7:15 PM. Reason : c]

10/31/2012 7:13:48 PM

I mean, I don't think you can simply pocket the extra.

10/31/2012 7:17:39 PM

Donate it ?

haha jk

10/31/2012 7:22:19 PM

Well it isn't Biden we are talking about...

10/31/2012 10:14:19 PM

Haha, Barack Obama stole Chris Christie from the republicans the week before the election.

10/31/2012 10:17:46 PM

Karl Rove has called the election. Turn off the lights and go home folks. He predicts none other than............. Willard Mitt Romney will be your next president.

What a twist!

10/31/2012 10:37:57 PM

Ohio just moved from lean Obama to toss-up.

11/1/2012 8:20:28 AM

What does that even mean? According to who?

Of the last 11 polls there, ONE has a tie or Romney lead and no big shocker it's Rasmussen. Surely in reality it's still a heavy Obama lean.

[Edited on November 1, 2012 at 8:30 AM. Reason : Rcp has always had OH as a tossup fwiw]

11/1/2012 8:27:11 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/11/01/ohio-moves-back-into-the-toss-up-category-on-fix-electoral-map/?tid=wp_ipad

and toss-up means that the race is tightening so much that he can no longer say that it's leaning one way or the other - just in Ohio.

Granted - Ohio is going to be the state that most likely determines this election.

11/1/2012 8:32:17 AM

Lol I know what it means but you didn't post a source and there are hundreds of places that have maps. I just went to the few I know well and didn't see it. That's all I meant.

Thanks for link.

11/1/2012 8:36:07 AM

you asked i explained. apologies for assuming that you're like most people who post in TSB who think they know all there is to know about politics, but they really don't

11/1/2012 8:37:04 AM

Quote :

"After reviewing all of the available public polling data as well as talking to operatives in both parties about the private polls they are privy to, we are convinced that Ohio is a 1-3 point race in President Obama’s favor at the moment."

And you thought this was a credible source of information?

11/1/2012 8:44:12 AM

Cillizza is a credible source of information. He's one of the best in the business.

11/1/2012 8:49:57 AM

So Pew and Gallup have Romney +6-7 in early voting yet I see no swing state early voting numbers that favor Romney still.

What. Is. Happening.

Such odd discrepancies.

[Edited on November 1, 2012 at 9:10 AM. Reason : X]

11/1/2012 9:04:16 AM

are pew and gallup doing LV or RV and what are their sample sizes and demographics?

11/1/2012 9:06:25 AM

My absentee ballot was received and accepted yesterday in Wake County!

Even when my family is back in NC full time I may vote absentee. There's something nice about just sitting a paper ballot on the table, having your voter information right there, and filling it out with your spouse and kids present (spouse filling out her own, of course). It makes me understand some of the reasons Oregonians like Vote-By-Mail.

11/1/2012 10:03:54 AM

Interesting read on 538 this morning. The discrepancy between state and national polls could be an indication that one of the two has a pretty large systemic error.

11/1/2012 11:12:32 AM

^^One year when I was overseas I didn't get my absentee ballot until after the election was already decided.

11/1/2012 11:57:04 AM

Quote :

"What I am asking, more specifically, is that is this a strategy where he is hoping that dumping more money into PA may convince others that his momentum is catching on in other "blue" states?"

Nah, it's just that he's running out of places to spend his money where it could actually affect the outcome of the race. Ohio has been saturated with ads for half the year, and it's pretty clear that the polls aren't moving there. He's going to go into election night behind by ~2-4% , with a huge early vote deficit. He's doing better in states like VA, FL, and CO, but even if he won all those states, he still loses without OH. Even winning Wisconsin (lol) won't get him to 270 without OH, assuming Obama holds NH, NV, and IA. That's the bleak math he's looking at when deciding where to do a money dump. So he needs to try and bring a big state like PA back into play in order to make an EC victory appear more plausible.

[Edited on November 1, 2012 at 12:46 PM. Reason : :]

11/1/2012 12:44:22 PM

Quote :

"with a huge early vote deficit"

Risking repetitiveness, why do Gallup and Pew show HUGE advantages to Romney in the early vote when all individual state polls in battleground states (save CO) show the exact opposite??

These are not polls with LV/RV assumptions.

v I've often wondered how in tune with internal polling candidates actually are. Do their advisors even tell them the daily news? I imagine its hard to campaign well knowing you are up against it.

[Edited on November 1, 2012 at 1:03 PM. Reason : X]

11/1/2012 1:01:02 PM

Surely he knows just how fucked he is, right? Or maybe not. I can only imagine what a mind-bending fever dream 6 months straight of campaigning is, believing it could work has to be the only way to avoid descending into total madness.

11/1/2012 1:01:52 PM

^^I have no idea. If they are counting absentee votes as early votes, than that could be one reason. Republicans have always led in absentee votes across the nation. They could also just be wrong. This is why we have poll aggregates.

^Oh he knows, watch one of his recent stump speeches. He's all over the place. Unhinged and on the verge of being completely manic. Like a head coach after a big loss that knows he just lost his job.

[Edited on November 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM. Reason : :]

11/1/2012 1:06:34 PM

cant you say the same thing about Obama trying to get florida in a rush

11/1/2012 2:06:27 PM

I can't imagine the grinder of what a presidential campaign must be like. 2+ years of soft campaigning, kissing ass for $, primaries, everyone (including your own party) all up in your shit from the time you were born looking for gotchas, the last 6 months before the elections.... I'm surprised some of these folks make it through it, win or lose.

Hell, look at what happens to you if actually win the damn election. Clinton, Bush II, and Obama looked decently healthy when they took office, but damn if they didn't age 40 years in the first 6 months.

11/1/2012 2:30:07 PM

11/1/2012 2:37:13 PM

Quote :

"cant you say the same thing about Obama trying to get florida in a rush"

Not really. Obama was leading in Florida as recently as early October. The latest polling suggests its a pure tossup. IMO, it'll be the last state to be called this year. Romney going after PA would more like Obama going after a state like Arizona. The polling there has never suggested that it's anything other than a done deal.

11/1/2012 2:44:08 PM

Quote :

"I can't imagine the grinder of what a presidential campaign must be like. 2+ years of soft campaigning, kissing ass for $, primaries, everyone (including your own party) all up in your shit from the time you were born looking for gotchas, the last 6 months before the elections.... I'm surprised some of these folks make it through it, win or lose. Hell, look at what happens to you if actually win the damn election. Clinton, Bush II, and Obama looked decently healthy when they took office, but damn if they didn't age 40 years in the first 6 months. "

Our political system is broken, and it's gotten more broken over time. It was never intended for things to be a perpetual campaign. The effect of the internet and social media on politics is staggering, and we crossed the 2 billion mark for campaign spending over the past few months.

For comparison, the Curiosity mission in its entirety costed 4 billion spread over years.

11/1/2012 2:54:30 PM

Quote :

"Hell, look at what happens to you if actually win the damn election. Clinton, Bush II, and Obama looked decently healthy when they took office, but damn if they didn't age 40 years in the first 6 months."

Not to say that the rigors of the job have nothing to do with it, but the prevailing reason for this is the age Presidents generally take office at. The effects of aging on men really start to accelerate around your late 40s, early 50s.

11/1/2012 3:00:44 PM

plus white ppl age poorly compared to other races

11/1/2012 3:01:55 PM