« On the economy, both sides are spot on | Main | Headwinds for the American worker »

25 September 2012

Comments

THEMIKEYMCD

George, glad to know that you have a strong enough stomach to listen to NPR (I don't).

Ironic that Obama spoke about slavery on the same day that I received a 'thanks to Obamacare we are raising your health premiums 58% letter.'.

Mr. President, progressivism is slavery.

Paul Emery

I like Nate Silver.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/

He was the most accurate pollster in 08. He currently sees Obama with a 79% chance of victory. HE is worth reading just to observe his methodology.

Michael Anderson

I totally agree Paul. And if you look at the trending graph for electoral votes on the right, Romney is taking a downward turn and Obama is heading up.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/author/nate-silver/

Virginia, Florida, Ohio -- these are the phat ones. And Ohio looks to be the phattest one again.

Todd Juvinall, call your office!

Todd Juvinall

Romney 54 Obama 46. You can take it too the bank.

Steven Frisch

Mitt Romney has not won a single national poll since August 27th.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html#polls

That is 20 straight national polls for President Obama.

Not that that means anyone should stop working, but it does mean 'the Colon" is full of beans.

Russ Steele

Red State has some insights on Nate Silver

• Nate Silver is a political blogger – specialty; polls and polling – with both a devoted following and a sweet gig doing poll matters for the New York Times.
• Silver has both because he enjoys a reputation as having a keen insight into the polling process, and an enviable track record at predicting results.
• If you drill down on that, you quickly realize that Silver’s predictive abilities are largely due to his performance in the 2008 election cycle; during the 2010 cycle his earliest predictions about Congress (and his insights about how Republicans were thinking about the issues) first turned out to be laughably bad, then became extremely low-key until it became clear to EVERYBODY that the Republicans were going to win big. Still, getting 2008 right is good, yes?
• Well. It turns out that the Obama campaign fed Silver huge amounts of their internal polling material during the 2008 cycle. Nate Silver did not disclose this, due to a confidentiality agreement.
• I would like to note at this moment that there is nothing illegal about the previous bullet point.
• Whether this was ethical, however, is a completely different story. Presidential internal polls are gold-standard; campaigns can afford the best data, expect the best data, and get the best data. If Nate Silver was able to cross-check outside polls with the stuff being fed him by Obama for America, he would be in a position to better detect polls and results whose flaws were hidden. In other words: insider access likely allowed Silver improve his ability to sort through the chaff for the wheat, and thus improve his reputation.

Question, does Silver have the inside info now. If so, why is Obama buying an estate in Hawaii to be ready in January?

Russ Steele

Here is a gut level view of the coming election: DIRECT FROM CAESAR’S PALACE

A Las Vegas "odds maker" gives his reasons for big win by Romney in November.

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither.

I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas odds maker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

But as an odds maker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them.

Back in late December I released my New Year's Predictions. I predicted back then - before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt - that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until election day. But that on election day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient - common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now - and that is a bad harbinger.


** Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians. He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

** Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel. Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed. I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60's. This is not good news for Obama.

** Youth voters. Obama's biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama.

** Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won't happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

** Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to give someone different a chance. As I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business . . . that he'd support unions over the private sector in a big way . . . that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn't listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

** Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing ? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

** Suburban moms. The issue isn't contraception, it's having a job to pay for contraception. Obama's economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children's future. This is not good news for Obama.

** Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008 ?

Will anyone in America wake up on election day saying, I didn't vote for Obama 4 years ago, but he's done such a fantastic job, I can't wait to vote for him today ? Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure ?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas odds maker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama's radical and risky socialist agenda.

It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

Todd Juvinall

Russ, great info on Silver. The true lib believers will never accept it though.

Steven Frisch

So if Silver has inside information, as Russ said, he is more likely to be basing his projections on the most accurate data. And he has Obama's odds of winning at 80-20.

Todd Juvinall

Romney's numbers are the reverse.

George Rebane

I wonder if anyone is willing to make book on their assessment that Obama is a shoo-in.

Steven Frisch

I will bet you $150 worth of dining at the Nevada County restaurant of your choice. If you win I will show up (with spouse), at your restaurant and read a passage of your choice from Atlas Shrugged, and share dinner with you and a couple of your choice. If I win you will show up (with spouse) at the restaurant of my choice and read a passage of my choice from An Inconvenient Truth, and share dinner with the couple of my choice.

Straight up---no odds--no point spread.

Deal?

Steven Frisch

Spouse unconvinced!

George Rebane

StevenF 606pm - Without prejudice I will have to refuse. In my 801am I was fishing for revealing odds from someone here who would put their conviction into a money bet. For example I was hoping that PaulE would give me a chance at something with 5:1 Obama wins. The dinner bet could perhaps be tailored that way (fraction of bill paid?), or saved for something more even in nature.

Bonnie McGuire

"Gain the name of being a gentleman, for it is enough to make you loved." George, that's what makes your site a breath of fresh air. It's a pleasure to read what you have to say. Thank you for being a gentleman.

Account Deleted

I see the lefties here are all a-twitter over the prospect of an Obama win. More massive public debt. Electricity bills that "will necessarily sky-rocket", higher unemployment, increasing war and revolution in the mid east putting radical Muslims into power, private economic output slumping, more cronyism and cover-ups, large tax increases for the middle class for Obama care. Shall I go on? What, exactly, will you celebrate? Obama's re-election won't hurt us conservatives nearly as much as it will hurt the poor. You've gotten so caught up in the horse race, you've forgotten the reason we have elections. It's not so "rah rah, our team wins", it's to provide our country with capable leadership following the Constitution. On election day, the left will limp around while they celebrate, having blown off all of their own toes. You'll get what you want - for a while. You just can't keep printing money forever.
Outside of a massive world war, it's all the left has to keep things afloat.

TomKenworth

I already have $100 on the line that I will be paying to Hospitality House if Romney wins, in a bet balanced by Woody who will pay the same amount to HH if Obama wins.

TomKenworth

Sounds like if there's a war this time it will be Obama's fault. Of course you never blamed Bush for his....

Paul Emery

Russ

Obama buying an estate in Hawaii? So what!

Nate Silver has a "sweet gig" because he's expected to deliver the goods in Nov. Can you show me any pollster who ha a better historical on polls and their perspective than Nate Silver

The simple fact that no Republican has won the Presidency without winning Ohio in modern history is a fact and right now Obama is doing pretty well in Ohio by ALL accounts. Nate silver paints a difficult scenario for Romney if he loses Ohio.

A Math lesson from Nat Silver

" So can Mr. Romney win the election without Ohio?

The forecast currently makes Mr. Obama at least a 90 percent favorite to win in states that account for 237 electoral votes. If Ohio is added to his column, Mr. Obama is up to 255 electoral votes. Winning the presidency requires 270 votes.

Without Ohio, Mr. Romney would have 14 electoral votes to spare. He would burn through that slack immediately if he lost either Florida (29 electoral votes) or North Carolina (15). Of these, Florida is the bigger concern for Mr. Romney.

Losing both Florida and Ohio would almost assuredly be impossible for Mr. Romney to overcome. Out of the 25,001 simulations that we ran on Tuesday, there were no cases in which Mr. Romney won the Electoral College vote despite losing both states.

A more favorable piece of news for Mr. Romney is that he could lose both Ohio and Virginia and win the election. Mr. Romney would need to sweep all the other competitive states, including Wisconsin.

The combination that should perhaps most worry Mr. Romney, however, is the following: Mr. Obama wins Wisconsin and Iowa in addition to Ohio. Usually, Wisconsin and Iowa are the alter egos of Ohio: highly competitive states that are just a bit Democratic-leaning, compared with Ohio’s slightly Republican-leaning history. Since 1980, every Democrat has done worse in Ohio than in Iowa or Wisconsin.

In other words, it seems unlikely that Mr. Romney can salvage Iowa or Wisconsin if he has already lost Ohio — in which case he will lose the election. "

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/sept-25-romneys-narrow-path-without-ohio/

Paul Emery

Max Baer was asked why he was knocked out my Joe Lewis. His famous quote "I forgot to duck"

Obama is a bit much for Romney right now but it's not over yet. The question is does Romney have the talent and the crew to turn this around. By now there should have been a shakeup in his campaign staff. To use another boxing analogy Romney after having the crap beat out of him keeps saying " I'm just waiting him out"

If Romney was such a great Gov in Mass why is he losing by over 20% average ?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/ma/massachusetts_romney_vs_obama-1804.html

George Rebane

PaulE 1210am - You seem to be one happy camper these days. It is heartening to see so much joy concentrated in such a small package. Keep us updated with all the good news.

Steven Frisch

Really George, 5:1 odds? I guess you are buying into Mr. Silver's analysis!

George Rebane

SteveF 844am - not at all Steve, it is precisely the opposite. As in my 829am, the happy campers celebrating Mr Silver's work are all of the progressive mood. I was just inviting a quantitative commitment of that mood in the form of a bet. Any negative response to such an invitation might cause the arm's length reader to doubt the substance behind the exhilaration.

David King

Sorry! This is too funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tpAOwJvTOio

David King

Oops! Forgot this.

"Bayesian probabilist specifies some prior probability, which is then updated in the light of new, relevant data"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability

Paul Emery

Yes George

I'm simply thrilled that an weak and ineffective President is being challenged by a pathetic challenger with possibly the worst campaign in modern history. He makes Dukakis in a tank look heroic. What we have is a breakdown of our election process when Obama and Romney are the best we can come up with. That's why I'm shopping elsewhere

Anyone looking at this campaign must take Nate Silver seriously. Can you suggest another statistical analyst that might be worth looking at? What is your take on how Romney is doing?

George Rebane

DavidK 907am - good discussion, except where the author tries to draw a firm line, where there is none, between objectivists and subjectivists assessing prior probabilities. All Bayesians first attempt to be objectivists if the proper data obtains, and then to the degree necessary, they will inject or revert to subjectivism in order to proceed to a posterior probability. And this is correct, because the Bayes formulation accepts the use of beliefs (cf.Judea Pearl) the proper measure of which is probability.

Walt

Speaking of polls,, There is that issue of purposeful over sampling.
Word of that is getting out. Not to mention the DOJ doing "O" and Co's dirtywork when polls didn't reflect "O" in a good light.
Any Lefty news poll is suspect. The day of the media being neutral and being adversarial to gov. no matter who was in power are long gone.
Visiting some Lefty rag web sites comments, even Lefties are getting beat up on their own turf. More anti Lefty comments than in favor. ( as usual, it's Lefty's doing the name calling and insults since they have no facts or good record to work with)

Polls even say "O" is ahead in the coal states.. Really? with all the recent job losses and a lot more to come in the near future?
Mines are closing, power plants are going dark and those jobs will be gone as well. OH,YA,,, But the "polls" have him ahead.. Keep believing that. I guess you missed the union coal miners for Mitt. video.

David King

George Rebane | 27 September 2012

"All Bayesians first attempt to be objectivists if the proper data obtains, and then to the degree necessary, they will inject or revert to subjectivism in order to proceed to a posterior probability."

It seems to me that the current probabilities analysis are linked to older assumptions that do not take into account the massive availability of data and especially the proliferation of access. Lies / falsehoods are now lit up like a big fricking neon sign! Which is why we get things like:

Forget the past…Forward!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIZmLVYTHVI&feature=player_embedded

Sad to watch!

http://robinbrown.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/double-facepalm1.jpg


Steven Frisch

I don't usually post naked links so i'll just post a link naked....

http://www.umwa.org/?q=compac

Walt

MSNBC is back up to it's old tricks with doctored video/audio
tapes. This time it's Mitt who is the target.(again)
And our Leftist pals get their news* from these guys? ( and believe their polls)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/another-msnbc-scandal-blaze-readers-at-campaign-event-claim-network-misled-in-video-of-rally-chant/

Paul Emery

Walt writes

"Any Lefty news poll is suspect."

Fox poll has Obama up by 5. Are they a leftist poll?

George Rebane

re StevenF 903pm link - That must be a hard pill for that union to swallow. Romney could not be more clear that he supports coal mining and the jobs of these union miners. But their DNA says they must hew to the leftwing. But Obama has promised to shut them down. So now they sit there tongue-tied, not even being able to vote in their own best interest.

George Rebane

DavidK 802pm - Wow! where'd you find that little piece of feminist pandering to women? I am heartened that of all the women I know, none of them fall into the category of being indifferent to what has gone on during the last four years. This NPR correspondent must be talking about people like the 'President's stash women' of Detroit.

David King

It's Stephanie Cutter (born October 22, 1968) is a political consultant who currently serves as deputy campaign manager for President Barack Obama's 2012 reelection campaign.

Yes George, if I was really really stupid, I would tell my sisters that they only care about the future and want me to tell them stories about it!

... and then :(

Paul Emery

George

I never got a clear answer from you on this question. Does the Constitution protect a woman's right to chose abortion?

George Rebane

PaulE 440pm - I remember both your question and my answering it. But since you don't reference your question or my 'unclear answer', I can't find that exchange here. When/where did you ask it?

And that's why God invented time tags for comments so that we can unambiguously carry on multi-threaded, multi-person conversations with ease.

Todd Juvinall

George, perhaps asking PaulE if the Constitution protects murder might be in order/

Paul Emery

Every sperm is sacred right Todd

Todd Juvinall

Only when it makes a new PaulE or is it murder PaulE/ Please show us in the Xonstituion where murder is listed as a inalienable right. Sort of like the definition of privacy. I just can't seem to find it in there but hey, who cares roght? Soert of lke your being PO'd about Iran ccntra. But it appears we are all selective eh?

Paul Emery

Yes Iran Contra A golden moment in American Imperialism. I know you're proud of it Todd.

Might as well ban birth control as well because it circumvents Gods intent right?

Todd Juvinall

As usual you never answer the question. Todd Juvinall | 28 September 2012 at 09:04 PM

Constitution.

Russ Steele

Just in case that Paul and TK missed this polling news:

DRAMATICALLY DECLINING DEMOCRATIC VOTER REGISTRATION: Of course you won’t find this widely reported in the mainstream media. Fox News reports that a recent study by a left-leaning think tank, Third Way, shows a precipitous decline in voters registering as Democrat in key swing states. In Ohio, for example, there are 490,000 fewer registered voters than in 2008, 44 percent of whom reside in Cleveland and surrounding Cuyahoga County, where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2:1.

Ohio is not alone. . . . Democratic voter registration decline in eight key swing states outnumbered the Republican decline by a 10-to-one ratio. In Florida, Democratic registration is down 4.9 percent, in Iowa down 9.5 percent. And in New Hampshire, it’s down down 19.7 percent.

Another reason why many recent polls–which oversample Democrats and “weight” results based on 2008 presidential election turnout rates–may indeed be highly misleading.

George Rebane

RussS 951pm - There you go again being over informative. I was kinda hoping that the consumers of the lamestream wouldn't stumble on that little tidbit; but noo ... ;-)

Paul Emery

The "recent study " Fox refers to from Third Way is hardly recent. It was published in Feb. not August. Pure BS by FOX looking for good news. It was authored by Michelle Diggles 8 months. Check this link to authenticate the date and details of the report. This took me all of 10 minutes to debunk. Pure fabrication from FOX to claim that it was published in August. Bad bad bad

http://thirdwaythinktank.tumblr.com/post/17156149344

Fox News writes"Ohio is not alone. An August study by the left-leaning think tank Third Way showed that the Democratic voter registration decline in eight key swing states outnumbered the Republican decline by a 10-to-one ratio. In Florida, Democratic registration is down 4.9 percent, in Iowa down 9.5 percent. And in New Hampshire, it's down down 19.7 percent.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/27/drop-in-ohio-voter-registration-especially-in-dem-strongholds-mirrors/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+(Internal+-+Politics+-+Text)#ixzz27vy5XjHf

Paul Emery

This is worth reading to get a historical perspective of poll averages and political bias. He sums it up by saying

"But if there is such an error, the historical evidence suggests that it is about equally likely to run in either direction.

Nor is there any suggestion that polls have become more biased toward Democratic candidates over time. Out of the past seven election cycles, the polls had a very slight Republican bias in 2010, and a more noticeable Republican bias in 1998, 2000 and 2006.

They had a Democratic bias only in 2004, and it was very modest.

Still, 2004 went to show that accusations of skewed polling are often rooted in wishful thinking."

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/poll-averages-have-no-history-of-consistent-partisan-bias/

Walt

The state has just screwed or is about to,, everyone with a lake or pond on their property. It gets even worse if there is fish in them.
the full story in in the Bee.

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/30/4866937/fish-and-game-permit-proposal.html

George Rebane

Walt 428pm - Thank you Walt, this is nothing less than a 'taking' by government through one of its faceless bureaus backed by the full force of the government gun and celebrated by progressives nationwide as another ratchet downward on individual liberties and property ownership. The sheeple will just grumble in their beer and forget all about it when election time comes around.

The Founders' question underpinning the Great Experiment rings in my ears, 'Is the common man capable of ruling himself?' I fear that in our Great Society, common man has lost the ability to do so.

Walt

Mr. R.. When I saw this, It made me somewhat happy we "sold the farm" We had 10 acres of water ( surface aria) just on one pond alone. From what I read, if we still had that, it may have cost us thousands a year to keep the state happy with paperwork and fees.
Not to mention having the fish tested at GOD knows what expense.
Then making sure none escaped out the overflow.

I bet one or two of our "green" friends have some water hole on their property. Lets see how they like the new rules.

We ( you and I ) know of one such individual who loves all those CARB rules, but also claims he's exempt for some wild reason.
He also thinks a contractor's licence doesn't apply to him. I wonder if he actually went and checked to see that he was in the wrong. ( I doubt it) That includes his equipment he feels doesn't need to meet CARB requirements.
We have a few that feel the laws are for others to follow.

THEMIKEYMCD

If I were Romeny I would run ads with this in it starting yesterday...

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/a-big-and-updated-version-of-the-biggest-most-important-chart-in-american-politics/romerbernsteinaugust-2/

George Rebane

Mikey 910am - Russ Steele at NC2012 has been updating and running this chart for over a year (two?). It is indeed a powerful indictment of central planning and government incompetence. However, elected socialists are not good with numbers (one of the prereqs for becoming one), and the constituencies who vote for them come from an alarmingly large segment of the population - the 'President's Stash' contingent - that is totally innumerate and beyond hope.

The comments to this entry are closed.