Archives for October 2008

Obama	McCain
100.0% probability of winning	0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 364 electoral votes	Mean of 174 electoral votes

Yesterday’s analysis showed Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain by 363 to 175 electoral votes. There were new polls in California, Colorado, and Delaware released today, and as a consequence, Obama earns another electoral vote.

Now, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama still wins them all. Obama receives (on average) 364 to McCain’s 174 electoral votes. Obama would almost certainly win the election if it was held today.

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

Methods are described in the FAQ.The most recent version of this analysis can be found on this page.

Speaking of editorial endorsements, the Olympian today describes the governor’s race as a contest between “An efficient policy wonk running against a slick carnival hawker.”  So guess which candidate they endorse?

If you’ve noticed an absence of substantive posting from me over the past couple days, it’s not from a lack of writing.  In fact, I’ve written a couple of rants, several thousand words total, responding to the editorial endorsements of Dave Reichert by the both the Seattle Times, and even more disappointingly, the Seattle P-I.

It was cathartic.  It felt good.  But, well, sometimes one can be too honest, and at this point, really, what’s the point?  So I’ll just keep my least constructive comments to myself.

But I’m sitting here watching the debate between Darcy Burner and Reichert on KCTS-9, a debate in which Darcy is clearly kicking the incumbent’s ass, and so I just can’t let this all pass by without at least one blunt critique, and that is that both paper’s editorial boards appear to have knowingly endorsed the least intelligent, least knowledgeable, and least capable candidate.  As my 11-year-old daughter just aptly observed, Reichert “sounds like a little kid giving a report that he didn’t practice on, and knows nothing about.”

Or perhaps I give the editorial boards too much credit?

You see, I have always started from the basic assumption that the vast majority of voters would prefer elected leaders who are at least as smart and capable as they are.  These are our leaders after all, and we entrust in them huge responsibilities.  I accept that there are multiple intelligences, and that being book-smart is not a qualification on its own, but generally, it seems like a good idea to populate Congress with our best and our brightest.

And the fact is, Dave Reichert is, well, average.  There’s no getting around that.  He’s not well educated, he’s not well informed, and he has few if any accomplishments to show for his four years in the House.  Indeed, neither the Times nor the P-I argue that Reichert is exceptional in any way, instead, they argue, he is, well, good enough.

So if Reichert is good enough for our two dailies, what does that say about the editorial writers themselves?

Unlike me, do these editorialists simply not mind being represented by somebody who is less capable than they are?  Or does my assumption hold true, and are these editorialists simply as mediocre as Reichert?  Do they accept Reichert as good enough because they really do find him to be an intellectual equal?

I know I may come off as sounding a little elitist, but Congress is a very elite organization, and it just seems that our region would be best served by selecting the very best representatives we can find.  And Reichert simply is not that.

He is, however, the incumbent, and what we have seen from both papers is little more than a defense of incumbency, a circular logic that argues that Reichert’s experience in Congress, however unremarkable, is the singular qualification that makes him a better choice than Darcy.  And if that is the curious logic by which our region’s opinion leaders determine their endorsements, then my original assumption is left unchallenged.

Last week, the Houston Texans had an epic meltdown with Quarterback Sage Rosenfels fumbling twice at the end of the 4th Quarter to allow the Colts to come back from 17 points down and win 31-27. The Texans are now 0-4. After watching the end of the game, I checked out Battle Red Blog, a Texans blog, to see if anyone was calling for coach Gary Kubiak’s job yet. I stumbled across the Open Game Day Thread, which gave a pretty good summary of the Texans fans’ emotional ride last Sunday afternoon:

Eerie Foreshadowing – 1:07PM CDT

I’ve got a feeling that…

Once again, this game is going to come down to our butter-soft end of game defense. The Colts look very beatable of course, but how will our guys respond late in the 4th?

Swagger – 2:17PM CDT

Agressive – even with a ten point lead in the fourth. LOVE it.

Counting Chickens Before They’ve Hatched – 2:27PM CDT

Hey motherfuckers

We’re going to win this game.

Hubris – 2:41PM CDT

We are gonna have to get a first down!!!! Stop playing like we are running the clock out with 20 secs left

Within a minute of that last comment being posted, Rosenfels kept the ball and tried to run for a first down. But instead of sliding, tried to leap over several defenders. Predictably, he fumbled, the Colts recovered and ran it back for a touchdown to close the lead to 3. Dumbest play I’ve seen all year (other than DeSean Jackson dropping the ball right before he scored a touchdown for the Eagles).

The thread continued:

Bewilderment – 2:41PM CDT

What the flying fuck was that shit?

The Colts then kicked off to the Texans again, where they ran the ball for one yard on first down, taking 40 seconds off the clock.

Not Learning From Earlier Mistakes – 2:45PM CDT

they have got to fucking get a first down. 2 yards a clip won’t cut it

With 2nd and 9 from Houston’s 21, the Texans call two pass plays in a row. Why!?! Run out the fucking clock, dummies. Karma delivered on 3rd and 9 as the Colts stripped the ball from Rosenfels again, giving them the ball at the Houston 20 with 2:36 still left. Manning eventually threw the game-winning touchdown to Reggie Wayne.

Rage – 2:46PM CDT

FIRE THEM ALL

Insanity – 2:50PM CDT

lxkjvlkdjsfvkajflaksdmvsfdjvmglskjv

Defeat – 2:54PM CDT

Gutted.

I think sports may finally have broken me entirely.

Dude, I’ve been there.

Obama	McCain
100.0% probability of winning	0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 363 electoral votes	Mean of 175 electoral votes

Yesterday’s analysis showed Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain by 363 to 175 electoral votes. There were six new polls released today—including four important swing states—but almost nothing has changed. For the third day straight, the electoral vote tally is unchanged. Pretty unusual.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins every one, suggesting that, in an election held now, Obama would have a 100.0% probability of winning. Once again, Obama gets (on average) 363 to McCain’s 175 electoral votes.

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

Methods are described in the FAQ.The most recent version of this analysis can be found on this page.

Last weekend’s contest was won by ‘w7ngman’ at 7:27. It was Addison, TX. This week’s is a little harder. Good luck!

Sarah Palin got loudly booed at the [Soon-to-be-named-for-whoever-buys-Wachovia] Center before the Philadelphia Flyers home opener.

Obama	McCain
100.0% probability of winning	0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 363 electoral votes	Mean of 175 electoral votes

There was little change in the electoral map after the release of seven new polls in six states today. Obama led by a remarkable +8% in a Florida poll, and +2% and +5% in two Ohio polls. Oh…Obama led by +11% in Oregon, too. Today’s big surprise was that McCain’s lead in Georgia has dwindled to +3% in a new poll today.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama still wins every one of them. He receives (on average) 363 to McCain’s 175 electoral votes—same as he had yesterday. If the election was held now, Obama would almost certainly win.

Here is how this election has evolved over the past eight months. In early September we saw a Palin bump (as Goldy likes to call it) or a transient “Republican awakening” as I call it. Since about mid-September, Obama has rapidly recovered any lost ground and then some.

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

Methods are described in the FAQ.The most recent version of this analysis can be found on this page.

I’m going to take John McCain at his word in the video below, where he essentially smacks down the GOP hate mongers. There are a lot of us who had a begrudging respect for McCain for a lot of years, and at least to me it’s pointless to worry about whether he should have said this a few days ago or whatever.

He said it, and as a fellow citizen I thank him. We all make mistakes. (Props to TPM for the video.) Naturally I cannot support McCain as I disagree wholeheartedly with him, but I’m no longer feeling like he wants the crazy people to get even crazier. That’s an act of patriotism in my book.

So when Sarah Palin talks about being a “reformer,” is she talking about this?

A legislative committee investigating Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has found she unlawfully abused her authority in firing the state’s public safety commissioner. The investigative report concludes that a family grudge wasn’t the sole reason for firing Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan but says it likely was a contributing factor.

Once again, A. Birch Steen or Lou Guzzo?

Darcy Burner and Dave Reichert debated again this afternoon, and from what I’m hearing, she kicked his ass.  Watch for yourself tonight at 7PM, on KCTS Channel 9.

After a wild ride in which it opened with a 700 point slide, the Dow see-sawed back and forth, eventually closing down only 128 points.  So rather than redoing yesterday’s chart to reflect the decrease in the Bush-era return from -19% to -20%, I thought I’d take a stab at charting the NASDAQ, which actually closed slightly up today.

Let’s hear it for our “CEO President.”

Josh Marshall explains the bogus Republican claims of “fraud” surrounding ACORN and voter registration. Well worth a full read, but here’s a sample:

I’ve always had questions about whether this is a good way to do voter registration. And Democratic campaigns usually keep their distance. But here’s the key. This is fraud against ACORN. They end up paying people for registering more people then they actually signed up. If you register me three times to vote, the registrar will see two new registrations of an already registered person and the ones won’t count. If I successfully register Mickey Mouse to vote, on election day, Mickey Mouse will still be a cartoon character who cannot go to the local voting station and vote. Logically speaking there’s very little way a few phony names on the voting rolls could be used to commit vote fraud. And much more importantly, numerous studies and investigations have shown no evidence of anything more than a handful of isolated casing of actual instances of vote fraud.

As McCain’s crowds continue to turn nasty and hateful, the bogus attack on ACORN is simply one more cog in a Republican slime machine that is working overtime. The Swiftboating has little chance of working at this point, both because of the economic scandal and because Americans have seen this crap before and (by and large) aren’t falling for it. People could care less about anything except the ominous threats to their financial well-being.

Epic fail!