HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Archives for October 2012

Worse than Bush–Cheney?!?

by Darryl — Friday, 10/26/12, 12:19 am

Over at The Ave a guest editorial appears from Robert called, “The Worst Case Scenario” (my emphasis):

Assuming Romney & Ryan (these lethal bozo’s should not have even been close) win their attitude of extreme conservative austerity, the sworn oath of the Tea party politicians to never raise taxes on the wealthy and the republican obsession to regain power by sabotaging the black man’s presidency at any cost will result in America’s very own holocaust. The next four years will include a collapse of the American economy, drastically increased unemployment, destroy the social safety net, gut the public schools system, close the US Post Office, deprive millions of healthcare, expand the war on collective bargaining and working people, on women, on the underemployed, on minorities, end fair elections, end affordable higher education, reinforce a corporate dominated supreme court, keep money in politics, start unnecessary wars resulting in millions of casualties, destabilize world peace, put global warming on steroids which could be the beginning of the end of the human species. The Tea party republicans then would give the trillions they skin for social services to the already obscenely rich and a bloated military.

Robert argues his case from these premises.

To me, the essay is a little over the top, and a little on the pessimistic side. But it raises a good question: “What is the worst case scenario for a Romney–Ryan presidency?”

I remember when Shrub more-or-less won in 2000. I imagined that we were in for a depressing four years in which not much got accomplished except the decimation of the responsible fiscal budgetary policy of the Clinton administration.

And then came 9/11.

Rather than impeaching the President for ignoring a memo titled, “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US”, America reacted by turning over and playing dead.

The nine years that followed were a worst case scenario, from throwing fiscal responsibility totally out the window, starting two wars, including one that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, allowing N. Korea to develop and test a nuclear weapon, providing for unprecedented powers of spying on the American people, creation of the seemingly biblically inspired Department of Homeland Security and the fucking TSA (together a huge expansion of the federal government), sanctioned torture in our name, indefinite detention, vilification of Islam, and the Roberts/Alito court.

And the whole clusterfuck was capped by the collapse and near-ruin of the U.S. economy.

Man…that was some shitty scenario! But not really on the level of a holocaust—except, maybe, what happened in Iran.

Would a Romney–Ryan administration be worse than that? I cannot imagine it so…

But, then again, I could not foresee the profound wounds that the Bush–Cheney administration would end up inflicting on my country.

So what do you think? Am I not pessimistic enough? Is Robert too pessimistic? Seriously, what is the likely and the worst case scenarios from a Romney–Ryan administration?

Just how bad could it get?

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: Obama gains, race has stabilized

by Darryl — Thursday, 10/25/12, 11:59 am


Obama Romney
93.0% probability of winning 7.0% probability of winning
Mean of 299 electoral votes Mean of 239 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

[Note: This analysis was completed this morning, but publication was delayed for the two previous posts. New polls are probably out by now…they will be included in my next analysis.]

The previous analysis showed President Barack Obama leading Governor Mitt Romney by 292 to 246 electoral votes. The Monte Carlo analysis give Obama a 93.4% and Romney a 6.6% probability of winning an election held now.

There was a boatload of new polls released in the past couple of days. But before discussing them, I should point out, that I am now using a ten-day “current poll” window. This means the analysis works with polls taken within the past ten days whenever possible. Next Tuesday, if enough polls are being released, I’ll shrink the window down to one week. After some poll talk, I’ll discuss the effect on the results of shrinking the window.

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
AR AR Poll 09-Oct 14-Oct 642 4.0 31 58 R+27
CT Rasmussen 21-Oct 21-Oct 500 4.5 52 45 O+7
CT Quinnipiac 19-Oct 22-Oct 1412 2.6 55 41 O+14
CT SurveyUSA 19-Oct 21-Oct 575 4.2 53.4 39.5 O+13.9
CT Mason-Dixon 15-Oct 17-Oct 626 4.0 49 42 O+7
FL Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 759 3.6 46.8 46.6 O+0.2
FL Mellman Group 18-Oct 21-Oct 800 3.4 47 47 tie
IN Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 754 3.6 38.3 51.5 R+13.2
MA WBUR 21-Oct 22-Oct 516 4.4 56 36 O+20
MI Baydoun 22-Oct 23-Oct 1122 2.9 46.9 46.6 O+0.3
MN Rasmussen 21-Oct 21-Oct 500 4.5 51 46 O+5
MT Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 828 3.4 41.3 47.5 R+6.2
NE Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 783 3.5 31.4 42.9 R+11.5
NV PPP 22-Oct 24-Oct 636 3.9 51 47 O+4
NV Rasmussen 23-Oct 23-Oct 500 4.5 50 48 O+2
NV ARG 19-Oct 22-Oct 600 4.0 49 47 O+2
NH Rasmussen 23-Oct 23-Oct 500 4.5 48 50 R+2
NH ARG 19-Oct 22-Oct 600 4.0 47 49 R+2
NH Lake 18-Oct 22-Oct 400 4.9 48 45 O+3
NY Marist 18-Oct 21-Oct 565 4.1 61 35 O+26
ND Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 807 3.4 39.3 49.4 R+10.1
ND Rasmussen 17-Oct 18-Oct 600 4.0 40 54 R+14
ND Essman 12-Oct 15-Oct 500 4.4 32.4 56.8 R+24.4
OH Rasmussen 23-Oct 23-Oct 750 4.0 48 48 tie
OH Time 22-Oct 23-Oct 742 3.0 49.3 43.7 O+5.7
OH Lake 20-Oct 23-Oct 600 — 46 44 O+2
OH SUSA 20-Oct 22-Oct 609 4.1 47.2 44.2 O+3.0
OH Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 810 3.4 49.9 45.2 O+4.7
PA Pharos 19-Oct 21-Oct 760 3.6 49.5 45.5 O+4.0
VA PPP 23-Oct 24-Oct 722 3.6 51 46 O+5
VA Mellman Group 18-Oct 21-Oct 800 3.5 46 45 O+1
WA Strategies 360 17-Oct 20-Oct 500 4.4 52 39 O+13
WI Mason-Dixon 15-Oct 17-Oct 625 4.0 48 46 O+2

Two new Florida polls both have the candidates tied. Still, Romney takes four of the seven current polls, giving Romney a thin +1.4% lead in “votes” and a 77% probability of winning an election held now.

Indiana polls are notable because they are relatively rare. This new poll confirms that Romney has a good lock on the state.

Michigan turns in a squeaker…essentially a tie, with Obama up by +0.3%. With one other current poll giving Obama a +6%, Obama holds a 79% probability of winning the state.

The new poll in Minnesota is the only current poll for the state. With Obama up by a thin +5%, his probability of winning the state is 79%.

We get a new Nebraska poll showing Romney up by +11.5%. Unfortunately, we don’t get the breakout of the Nebraska congressional districts. Mid-September was the last time we had a poll for NE-2, and that showed a 44%–44% split. Obama won NE-2 in 2008 by +1.2%, so in the event of close race, NE-2 could end up being kingmaker.

Three new Nevada polls all go to Obama by quite small margins (+4%, +2% and +2%). In total, we have six current polls and they all favor Obama, giving him a 96% probability of winning now. The last three months of polling in the state tell a story of a small, but stable, lead:

ObamaRomney25Sep12-25Oct12Nevada

Three new New Hampshire polls go 2:1 for Romney. In fact, the candidates split the six current polls. Obama comes out +1.4% ahead in the “votes”, largely on the strength of one University of New Hampshire poll.

Three North Dakota polls in one week? Go figure! But, no doubts, either. Romney is double-digit solid there.

Five new polls come in for Ohio. Romney takes exactly zero of them, although the Rasmussen poll is a tie, and Obama’s leads are pretty small. The current polls support a small lead for Obama, and jointly give him a 96% probability of winning right now. The past month of polling in this race shows a race that has been stable with, on average, a small advantage for Obama:

ObamaRomney25Sep12-25Oct12Ohio

Pennsylvania supports Obama over Romney by +4.0%. The three current polls give Obama a +4% advantage that translates into a 90% probability of winning the state now.

Two new Virginia polls give Obama a +5% and +1% edge over Romney. With three of four current polls in Obama’s column, Virginia turns blue. Obama’s lead is tenuous, however, and he has only a 67% probability of winning the state now.

In the new Washington poll, Obama gets a solid double-digit lead.

Obama gets a narrow lead in the new Wisconsin poll. With all three current polls giving him a small lead, Obama gets a 90% probability of winning an election now in the state.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 93,023 times and Romney wins 6,977 times (including the 611 ties). Obama received (on average) 299 (+7) to Romney’s 239 (-7) electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 93.0% (-0.4) probability of winning and Romney would have a 7.0% (+0.4) probability of winning.

The large batch of new polls, combined with the ten-day “current poll” window, has increased Obama’s expectation for electoral votes by +7, but slightly reduced the probability of winning. The reduced probability reflects the fact that the smaller window results in a smaller number of polls and, therefore, polled individuals. And a smaller sample of “voters” increases uncertainty in the outcome. Essentially the ten-day window throws out older evidence. That way, if the race is undergoing shorter changes in the weeks before the election, the analysis will more likely pick them up.

The time series graph (from elections simulated every 7 days using polls from 25 Oct 2011 to 25 Oct 2012 [FAQ]), it looks like Romney’s post-first-debate gains peaked a week or two ago. The race has, at least, stabilized, and Obama’s slight gain may be a sign of the trend reversing. It’s too early to claim that Obama has the momentum, however.

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

“France Loves To Hate Mitt Romney, And I Love France”

by Roya — Thursday, 10/25/12, 8:24 am

It seems to have worked out just perfectly that my first year in France is an American election year. I came with the intention to understand the culture of France and advance my level of French but what has been the most interesting part is learning about French culture and simultaneously critiquing and comparing it with our own systems in the States.

One thing that has really stood out is the interest that France takes in American politics. Whereas in the United States, we tend to take little to no interest in international politics unless we feel threatened by someone who came into power. And even then, it’s usually only the most politically informed who seem to know about international politics with any sort of depth. I’m sure we could all take a lesson from that, because we aren’t the only one’s living on this planet.

Another plus, not only do the French seem more often politically and internationally informed, according to a recent study done by BBC, France is the country with the highest support for Obama. However, by living here, that fact is pretty clear.

An easy way to depict this is by showing some of the numerous magazines that feature articles about the upcoming election.

Here are a few examples that I love:

"L'Amerique d'Obama" means "Obama's America"

“Obama’s America”; the cover of the most well known magazine series in France. They published this magazine with a full, detailed description of current state of the United States and the context and implications of this in the upcoming election.

l'insaissiable mitt romney

This is one of the articles in the same magazine that reads, “The Elusive Mitt Romey.”

romney contre le monde

Another magazine cover that reads, “Romney Against The World.” Sadly, a large portion of Americans can’t seem to see that…

obama obervateur

This one reads, “The America That We Love, And Those Who Scare Us.” With clear intentional placement of Obama next to the words, “the america that we love” and Romney next to “those who scare us”.

After posting a few of these photos on my facebook page, an American friend of mine living in Nantes as well cleverly stated, “France loves to hate Romney, and I love France.” Which in my opinion pretty well sums it up.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Transportation Budget

by Carl Ballard — Thursday, 10/25/12, 8:01 am

I don’t have much to add to this Seattle Transit Blog piece. But right on.

The few million in this proposed budget seems like so little compared to the huge Sound Transit projects many of us are used to – but in this case, at this time, it goes a long way.

In the next couple of years, Sound Transit is likely going to put together their ST3 package; sources in Sound Transit say it’s looking more likely that we could see a regional vote in 2016. The primary goals for the next package are to connect Everett, Tacoma and Redmond (and maybe Issaquah) with extensions of Link. This means there will be money in Seattle for projects too, but it might not be exactly the right amount for the big projects we need in the city – it could be too much for one surface or elevated rail line, or too little for underground rail. We don’t know.

The projects on the table right now – major improvements to the streetcar line on Westlake (likely making it more like Link than streetcar), connecting it through downtown to the First Hill line, to Ballard via Fremont, and to the U-district via Eastlake, building real BRT on Madison, and extending the First Hill streetcar to Aloha – are all projects that might fill in those gaps.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: McKenna takes the lead

by Darryl — Thursday, 10/25/12, 1:09 am

A new Elway poll has Washington state AG Rob McKenna leading former WA-1 Congressman Jay Inslee, 47% to 45%. The poll comes on the heels of a Strategies 360 poll showing the race tied up. The Elway poll surveyed 451 likely voters (4.5 MOE) from 18 Oct to 21 Oct.

A Monte Carlo analysis employing a million simulated elections, based only on the responses to this poll, gives McKenna wins 617,196 times and Inslee wins 369,576 times. The analysis suggests that, if the election was held today, McKenna would win with a 62.5% probability and Inslee would win with a 37.5% probability. Here is the distribution of election outcomes:

ElwayOct

This new poll is one of five recent (October) polls trying to assess this race, and they largely overlap:

Start End Sample % %
Poll date date size MOE Inslee McKenna
Elway 18-Oct 21-Oct 451 4.5 45.0 47.0
Strategies 360 17-Oct 20-Oct 500 4.4 46.0 46.0
PPP 15-Oct 16-Oct 574 — 48.0 42.0
SurveyUSA 12-Oct 14-Oct 543 4.3 47.0 44.0
Washington Poll 01-Oct 16-Oct 644 3.9 47.1 46.3

If you believe the dynamics of this race have not changed much over the several weeks, then a pooled analysis of the five polls can provide additional evidence of the state of the race.

The pooled sample provides 2,712 “votes”, of which 2,487 are for Inslee or McKenna. Inslee receives 1,267 “votes” (46.7%), and McKenna receives 1,220 “votes” (45.0%).

The Monte Carlo analysis gives Inslee 745,625 wins and McKenna 249,491 wins. The analysis suggests that, for an election held now, Inslee would win with a 74.9% probability and McKenna would win with a 25.1% probability:
FIVEOCTPolls

It’s hard to say which of these two analyses better reflect the dynamics of the race. But, it would be naive to deny that this race has tightened up in the past few weeks.

The Elway poll has a pretty small sample, which means there is more sampling error; but, combined with the Strategies 360 poll, it is perfectly justifiable to suggest that McKenna is really in the lead now.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Trumped Up

by Carl Ballard — Wednesday, 10/24/12, 8:02 pm

Seriously, Donald Trump is like the worst person in the world. It’s tough to imagine someone you don’t like offering to give money to charity, and you liking them less as a result, but kudos to Trump for paving the road to that particular place.

To be fair, we did enjoy your impression of Dr. Evil as you sat behind your very big desk and shouted into the camera, vowing to contribute “five mill-ion dol-lars!” to the charity of the president’s choice if he releases “to my satisfaction!” all of his college records and passport applications by, appropriately enough, Halloween at 5 p.m.

Seriously, Donald Trump, if you’ve got $5 Million to spend on charity, don’t play this game. Just give it to charity. Don’t waste the finite amount of time the President of the United States has on your paranoid nonsense. Just give the money to charity.

Also, passport applications? I’m pretty disorganized, but I’m not sure if I was better organized that I could just pull up all of the passport applications I’ve made in a week. And I’m not in the middle of, you know, running for president. Do you keep them? Would the government keep the passport applications of a 7 year old (or whatever) kid from Hawaii from when he went to visit his dad, like years after it had expired? That’s such a strange request. And really, can you imagine Obama using the last week of the campaign to argue with Trump about if that was really all, and the correct, passport applications to his satisfaction? That’s just bizarre.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 10/24

by Carl Ballard — Wednesday, 10/24/12, 8:01 am

– There ain’t enough fuck you in the world for this guy.

– Nepotism on full view on TV.

– At what point do the R-71 people give up their court case to keep their signatures hidden?

– It is ridiculous — RIDICULOUS — that we live in a society where it’s a good guess that a shooting in a place often frequented by women is going to be an extension of a “domestic dispute.”

– Family values.

– Bikers and walkers spend more money than drivers over time.

– Anyone interested in seeing a MST3King of BIRDEMIC tomorrow?

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Missing the Forest for the Bad Reporting

by Carl Ballard — Tuesday, 10/23/12, 5:20 pm

Goldy points to this piece by the Sky Valley Chronicle taking the Seattle Times to task for their Rob McKenna ad.

And now the Times asks for forgiveness. Asks for another chance.

But as the Times reader comment noted in the headline of this piece – produced in response to a column written by Times Executive Editor David Boardman called “A vow to continue impartial reporting,”- it may be far too little and way too late.

I get why people are upset with the ad. I’m upset with the ad. The real problem is that Frank Blethen runs the paper. The problem isn’t the perception, it’s the reality. The paper is owned by a bully who has a toy that he pretends is a public service, but that he uses to tilt toward corporate power and the status quo.

The ad is just a symptom of that. And the symptom was far worse a few years ago, for example, when The Seattle Times decided to run a phoney story about Darcy Burner’s diploma. But they circled the wagons when people like Goldy pointed it out.

And it wasn’t just The Seattle Times staff. I couldn’t find anything in the Sky Valley Chronicle criticizing that. Plenty of main stream people ran with it. After all, if it’s in The Seattle Times, it must be true. But that was far worse than the ad people in The Seattle Times giving away the space in their paper. That was a news decision clearly directed by Blethen’s desire to swing the race. So, color me unimpressed that the people who are fine that sort of content are upset about the ads around it.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Drinking Liberally — Seattle

by Darryl — Tuesday, 10/23/12, 12:26 pm

We had a great turn-out at the special debate edition of Drinking Liberally last night—a lot of new faces. Tonight we’ll have our regularly-scheduled gathering. Please join us for an evening of politics and conversation over a pint at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking Liberally.

We meet every Tuesday at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00pm. Some people show up earlier for Dinner.

Our gatherings are informal. If you show up and don’t immediately recognize the pack of liberals, ask a bartender or server.





Can’t make it to Seattle tonight? You have options. The Tri-Cities chapter also meets tonight. On Wednesday, the Burien and Bellingham chapters meet. And on Thursday the Woodinville chapter meets.

With 233 chapters of Living Liberally, including fourteen in Washington state, four in Oregon and three more in Idaho, chances are excellent there’s a chapter that meets near you.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: Inslee and McKenna tied up

by Darryl — Monday, 10/22/12, 9:30 pm

Strategies 360 has released a new poll that covers, among other things, the Washington state gubernatorial race between former Congressman Jay Inslee (D) and state AG Rob Mckenna (R). The poll of 500 likely voters (4.4% MOE) was taken from the 17th to the 20th of October.

The poll is tied up at 46% when leaners are included. (Without leaners, Inslee leads McKenna 43% to 40%, but my policy is to work with the numbers that include leaners.)

Obviously, at 50% each there is little point at running a Monte Carlo analysis. But, we now have four polls covering this race over the past several weeks:

Start End Sample % %
Poll date date size MOE Inslee McKenna
Strategies 360 17-Oct 20-Oct 500 4.4 46.0 46.0
PPP 15-Oct 16-Oct 574 — 48.0 42.0
SurveyUSA 12-Oct 14-Oct 543 4.3 47.0 44.0
Washington Poll 01-Oct 16-Oct 644 3.9 47.1 46.3

So, it would be worth analyzing all four of these polls together. The pooled polls gives a sample of 2,801 of which 2,558 go for one or the other candidates. Inslee gets 1,323 (47.2%) of the “votes” and McKenna gets 1,235 (44.1%).

The Monte Carlo analysis of 1,000,000 simulated elections using the pooled data gives Inslee wins 890,208 times and McKenna wins 107,592 times. If the election was held now, we would expect Inslee to win with a 89.2% probability and McKenna with a 10.8% probability. Here is the distribution of election outcomes:

FIVEOCTPolls

Clearly, what we have had all October is a very close race, but one in which Inslee has maintained a small edge. It looks to me like the race has tightened up a bit since September, as frequently happens in the final weeks of an election:

GenericCongress22Sep12-22Oct12Washington

The poll had a number of other interesting results for other races as well:

  • Obama 51%, Romney 35%
  • Initiative 1240 (Charter schools): 51% support, 34% oppose
  • Initiative 502 (marijuana): 54% support, 38% oppose
  • Referendum 74 (Uphold same-sex marriage law): 55% approve, 38% reject

The poll also asked people’s opinion on some topics. In looking for strategies to raise revenue to meet the Supreme Court’s ruling to better fund public education, 54% supported and 41% opposed an income tax on people making more that $200K. For capital gains tax on investment income, 47% supported the idea and 44% opposed. What people really hated was increases in state property tax, sales tax or B&O tax. Most people (59% support, 36% oppose) support an increase in state funding for higher education.

All in all, this survey makes Washington state look solid blue—except for that squeaker of a gubernatorial race.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Debate open thread

by Darryl — Monday, 10/22/12, 5:23 pm

The last in a series of presidential debates is on tonight, featuring President Barack Hussein Obama II (D) and former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney (R).

This debate will focus on foreign policy. But since Willard has little foreign policy experience beyond a courtesy visit to London (plus Israel and Poland) so that he could totally avoid watch Ann’s dressage horse compete in the Olympics, be prepared for the candidates to twist everything back into domestic issues.

I’ll be at the Montlake Ale House liveblogging as I can. Please join me there, or have fun in the comment threads, if you prefer.

6:04: Romney wins!!!! (the coin toss.)

6:05: Mitt opens with a lot of babbling and proclaims, “We can’t kill out of this mess.” Uh-huh.

6:08: “Gov. Romney, you strategy has been all over the map.” Certainly is was based on his opening answer.

6:09: Mitt wants “Gender equality”. Does he really know what he is saying? But this second answer is so babbly it’s hard to know what he is saying.

6:12: Obama hits Romney HARD on his inconsistent positions on foreign policy.

6:13: Romney hits Obama back on the “after the election” comment to Putin.

6:15: After a short bicker-fest, Obama comes out with a pretty coherent positive agenda.

6:18: Romney doesn’t have a plan for Syria…he just regurgitates factoids about the situation. Then, when he gets down to “action” points, his plan is what the Obama administration is ACTUALLY DOING RIGHT NOW. Sheesh!

6:21: Obama complements Romney on supporting the Obama administration on Libya and then punches him in the nose on his “mission creep” statement.

6:23: Mitt Romney tells us what “we all hear intelligence sources saying”. Damn…I can’t say…left my national security briefing binder at home.

6:27: Mitt declares himself a peacenik

6:28: Both candidates work in domestic issues. Obama did a better job sneaking it in. Romney criticizes the sequestration cuts…as if that’s Obama’s doing!

6:30: Mitt gives a speech directed toward the Priests of the Military Industrial Complex.

6:31: Obama does it again—turning the debate into a list of his accomplishments.

6:32: Obama hits below the belt…”[Romney] praised George Bush for his economic stewardship and Dick Cheney for ….”

6:34: Romney said “teacher’s unions” and Obama looked down! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooo……!!!!!!

6:36: We are now on the topic on whether class size makes a difference. In Afghanistan?!?

6:37: Obama gets surly while Romney babbles on about “his” education successes in MA.

6:39: No, Governor, we cannot afford to repeal Obamacare.

6:40: Obama gets his do-over from Debate 1: “five trillion dollar tax cuts…military spending that the military isn’t asking for…”

6:41: I’m watching NBC. Why is Obama on the right and Romney on the left? This is a conspiracy!!!!

6:42: Romney, “I balanced the budget for the Olympics”. Yes…Governor, with a little help of your taxpayer friends.

6:43: Obama finally defends himself against Romney’s bullshit of blaming Obama for sequestration cuts.

6:44: Obama lands a left hook with the “horses and bayonettes” zinger. Perhaps the best zinger of all three debates!

6:48: Mitt’s flaggey-flag pin is bigger. Obviously, he loves America more.

6:49: Mitt Romney thinks Ahmadinejad has committed more war crimes and crimes against humanity than George W. Bush and Dick Fucking Cheney???? Very curious.

6:51: We have about 20 folks at the Ale House who are, apparently, here for the debate.

6:54: Note to Obama…watch out for Tagg Romney running toward you….

6:55: Obama contrasts his visit to Israel with Romney’s…it seems pretty effective!

6:59: Mitt lets us know he has “a relationship with the Prime Minister of Israel.” No doubt he cultivated that relationship the same way he cultivated a relationship with the Prime Minister of the U.K.

7:01: Obama goes after Romney hard on his flip flopping. I noticed, he always ends those bits with a positive message. Good debate coaching.

7:04: Mitt just told all the terrorists when he will pull out of Afghanistan. Why does he hate our soldiers?

7:08: Bob: “Obama bin Laden”

7:10: I’ve heard Mitt say lots of things about Pakistan, but I am still not sure where he stands and what he would do?

7:11: Mitt drones on about his support for Drones. But, but, but, I thought we couldn’t “kill our way out of this”

7:14: Trending on Twitter (US): #horsesandbayonets

7:18: Via Twitter:

Abby Huntsman ‏@HuntsmanAbby
I’ve never heard two candidates agree more during what is suppose to be a “debate.”

7:17: Mitt wants to label China a “currency manipulator.” That will bring them to their knees.

7:21: Obama pushes the “Romney has bad political instincts” meme: outsourcing, “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”, etc.

7:23: Mitt: “I would do nothing to hurt Detroit.” Obama calls him out on that bullshit.

7:25: “Governor, you keep on trying to airbrush history.” Look up history here.

7:28: Romney keeps bringing up the same old bullshit about how much worse things are now then they were when Obama came into office. Two words: “Bikini Graph”

7:31: Mitt: “I want to see growing peace in this country.” Huh? This is the kind of thing that is said when politicians are on autopilot.

7:38: Promoted comment from Michael:

Moderate Mitt’s plans all seem to come down to being just like Obama, only white.

7:47: Debriefing: Michael nails it. Romney etch-a-sketched so far back to the center that he was, essentially, agreeing with Obama more than he was disagreeing. That ends up being a huge problem for him. After all, the power of incumbency is that given identical choices, the devil you know is better than the identical devil you don’t.

But, of course, the other problem is that by becoming The White Obama, he contradicts his past “non-Kenyan” self. You know, like most of the stuff he said in the G.O.P. primary. His strategy depends on potential moderate supporters not being disturbed by his total abdication of past positions. That may have worked 20 years ago, but in the age of The Twitter and a plethora of other social media…maybe not so much.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: A small surge for Romney

by Darryl — Monday, 10/22/12, 3:33 pm


Obama Romney
93.4% probability of winning 6.6% probability of winning
Mean of 292 electoral votes Mean of 246 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

We’re at an interesting point in the presidential race. I’ve been running analyses a couple of times a day as new batches of polls are found and entered, and the race has bounced up and down with each batch of polls. (I had a pretty packed weekend, so didn’t have the opportunity to post any of these analyses since my previous analysis.)

For example, yesterday afternoon, Romney was down to about 3% probability of winning. By yesterday late evening, with a few more polls, Romney had surged to something around 17%.

Today’s batch of polls have been mixed, but slightly more favorable to Obama.

Here they are:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CA Reason-Rupe 11-Oct 15-Oct 508 5.1 53 38 O+15
CO Rasmussen 21-Oct 21-Oct 500 4.5 46 50 R+4
DC PPP 12-Oct 14-Oct 1222 2.8 88 8 O+80
FL PPP 18-Oct 18-Oct 800 4.0 47 48 R+1
FL Rasmussen 18-Oct 18-Oct 750 4.0 46 51 R+5
FL SurveyUSA 17-Oct 18-Oct 600 4.1 47.5 45.5 O+2.0
FL FOX News 17-Oct 18-Oct 1130 3.0 45 48 R+3
FL CNN/OR 17-Oct 18-Oct 681 4.0 48 49 R+1
IA Rasmussen 21-Oct 21-Oct 500 4.5 48 48 tie
IA PPP 18-Oct 19-Oct 660 3.8 49 48 O+1
IA PPP 17-Oct 19-Oct 869 3.3 48 49 R+1
MD WA Post 11-Oct 15-Oct 843 4.0 60 36 O+24
MO PPP 19-Oct 21-Oct 582 4.1 46 52 R+6
MO Rasmussen 17-Oct 17-Oct 500 4.5 43 54 R+11
NV Mellman Group 15-Oct 17-Oct 600 4.0 51 43 O+8
NH U NH 17-Oct 21-Oct 773 3.5 51 42 O+9
NH PPP 17-Oct 19-Oct 1036 3.0 48 49 R+1
NJ SurveyUSA 17-Oct 18-Oct 577 4.2 56.3 41.5 O+14.9
NJ Stockton 12-Oct 18-Oct 811 3.5 53 38 O+15
NC Grove Insight 17-Oct 18-Oct 500 4.4 47 44 O+3
OH Suffolk 18-Oct 21-Oct 600 4.0 46.5 46.7 R+0.2
OH PPP 18-Oct 20-Oct 532 4.3 49 48 O+1
OH Quinnipiac 17-Oct 20-Oct 1548 3.0 50 45 O+5
OH Gravis Marketing 18-Oct 19-Oct 1943 2.2 47 47 tie
OH FOX News 17-Oct 18-Oct 1131 3.0 46 43 O+3
OR SurveyUSA 16-Oct 18-Oct 579 4.2 48.9 42.3 O+6.6
PA Gravis Marketing 21-Oct 21-Oct 887 3.3 48 45 O+3
PA Muhlenberg 17-Oct 21-Oct 444 5.0 50 45 O+5
UT U UT 08-Oct 13-Oct 206 7.6 21 74 R+53
VA PPP 18-Oct 19-Oct 500 4.4 49 47 O+2
VA Rasmussen 18-Oct 18-Oct 750 4.0 47 50 R+3
WI Rasmussen 18-Oct 18-Oct 500 4.5 50 48 O+2

Romney leads in the new Colorado poll. The candidates split 3 and 3, the six current polls. Overall, the edge goes to Obama who earned +1% more “votes”, and would be expected to win now with a 71% probability. Here is the last three weeks of polls in a picture:

ObamaRomney22Sep12-22Oct12Colorado

In D.C. Obama up by +80% over Romney. That’s not the probability of winning D.C.—that’s the point spread!

The five new Florida polls go 4:1 for Romney. He now leads in 9 of 11 current polls, usually by small, single-digit, margins.

Iowa must be close. We have one tie, a +1% for Romney and a +1% for Obama. Overall, with six current polls that show two ties, one lead for Romney, and three leads for Obama. Together, the polls support Obama winning with a 90% probability right now. Here is the picture:

ObamaRomney22Sep12-22Oct12Iowa

Two new Missouri polls, two new leads for Romney.

Obama takes the new Nevada poll. He now leads in five of six current polls, and the last one is a tie. Obama’s lead is expected to hold (now, anyway) with a 96% probability.

New Hampshire has been bouncing around for the past week. A new poll give Obama a +9% and another new poll gives Romney a +1%. Of the six current polls, Obama leads in two, Romney in three (but one is very close), and there is one tie. Overall, Obama takes +1% more of the “votes” and has about a 67% probability of winning.

We only get one new North Carolina poll, and it has Obama up by +3%. But Romney leads in four of the five current polls and, overall, has better prospects for winning the state—an 83% probability at this point.

Oh, Ohio, how you tease the Obama supporters and taunt the Romney supporters! There are five new polls and Romney leads in one of these by a +0.2% edge. The raw data are 280 “votes” for Romney and 279 “votes” for Obama. One other poll is a tie, and Obama takes the rest. But from a total of 12 current polls, Obama leads in eight of them. From a total of 11,289 surveyed individuals, Obama takes 51.1% and Romney takes 48.9%. Obama would be expected to win an election now in the state with a 95% probability.

It has been a month since the last Oregon poll, and the new one finds Obama with a modest +6.6% lead over Romney.

Two new Pennsylvania polls both have Obama leading, albeit narrowly. In fact, Obama has single digit leads in seven of eight current polls, with Romney up in the eighth.

Obama takes one of the two new Virginia polls. It has been a long time since that has happened. But Romney easily leads in four of the six current polls, and one of the six was a tie. Overall, Romney gets a 69% probability of taking the state in an election right now. This is clear from the past three weeks:

ObamaRomney22Sep12-22Oct12Virginia

The new Wisconsin poll goes to Obama, but by a tight +2%. Obama takes all five current polls, but all by small margins. Here is the big picture:

ObamaRomney22Sep12-22Oct12Wisconsin

From 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 93,430 times and Romney wins 6,570 times (including the 578 ties). Obama receives (on average) 292 (-8) to Romney’s 246 (+8) electoral votes. Obama has a 93.4% (-3.3%) probability of winning and Romney has a 6.6% (+3.3%) probability of winning.

The long term trends in this race can be seen from a series of elections simulated every seven days using polls from 22-Oct-2011 to 22-Oct-2012, and including polls from the preceding 14 days (FAQ).

Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 10/22

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 10/22/12, 8:00 am

– Right now Thurston County voters have a real opportunity to vote for change, for what stands to be a better way for all rate-payers.

– UW people, here’s a chance to ride in the rain.

– RIP George McGovern and praise the lord if you’re paying high taxes.

– The most important endorsement ever.

– News Corp’s shareholders are not particularly happy with the way the company is being run.

– I’m not as big a sriracha person as the author of this piece (how could anyone be?), but by coincidence I was having some soup when I started reading it, and immediately decided to add some. It was exactly what it needed.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Science matters

by N in Seattle — Sunday, 10/21/12, 4:30 pm

Almost five years ago, a small group of individuals began to call for a Presidential candidate Science Debate. The idea quickly gained momentum, with support from dozens of Nobel laureates, the leaders of over 100 major universities, prestigious scientific organizations (among them AAAS, the National Academies of Science and Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine), and tens of thousands of American citizens. From thousands of submitted questions, a list of 14 was eventually developed. Science Debate 2008 had bipartisan Congressional co-chairs, a television deal with NOVA, and even rented a venue. Unfortunately, although both the McCain and Obama campaigns produced written answers in 2008, neither side agreed to make science the topic of a debate.

The story in 2012 has been very much the same — tremendous support for a colloquy on the important scientific issues to be faced in the next few decades, a set of 14 serious questions, written answers but no debate. This cycle, the editors of Scientific American graded the Obama and Romney responses:

To make our determination, we invited readers to send us leads and solicited input from our board of advisers and other subject-matter experts. We scored the candidates’ answers on a five-point scale (with five being best), using the following criteria: how directly and completely they answered the question; scientific accuracy; feasibility (including economic viability and clear accounting for both revenues and costs); potential benefits to health, education and the environment; and sustainability (meaning how well the proposed solutions balance the needs of current and future generations).

While SA‘s evaluation found Romney to be more specific in his plans, and to have greater feasibility, Obama greatly exceeded Romney in scientific accuracy. In particular, Romney’s responses on climate change, ocean health, and freshwater “revealed an unfamiliarity with the evidence that shows how urgent these issues have become”. Also, as an opponent of Net Neutrality, Romney scored 0 on the question about the Internet.

The Science Debate people presented a subset of their questions — those particularly relevant to the Evergreen State — to the candidates for Governor of Washington. The issues on that list were:

  • Innovation
  • Climate Change
  • Education
  • Ocean Health
  • Vaccination and Public Health
  • Science in Public Policy

As would be expected from the author of a well-received book on green energy, Jay Inslee provided extensive and detailed answers to the six queries.

Rob McKenna’s responses, in full, are displayed below:

 
 
 
 
 

McKenna was invited to answer the questions on six different occasions. He failed to reply to any of the invitations. Even on what is allegedly his signature issue — education — his silence was deafening. In his typical weaselly fashion, McKenna opted to say nothing whatsoever instead of revealing his Republican anti-scientific orientation. He’ll do anything not to offend the teahadist GOP base in Washington while passively thumbing his nose at the reality-based voters in the Puget Sound environs.

Playing mute has worked for McKenna in the past; it worked well (and may almost have been appropriate) when he was running for a statewide service position. But after Dino Rossi’s twin failures to fool enough people in gubernatorial — that is, executive — elections, we the people of Washington are onto these barefaced attempts by conservative Republicans to bamboozle us.

If you haven’t already mailed in your ballot, what are you waiting for? Vote for Inslee (and Obama, Cantwell, Ferguson, Drew, Goldmark, Kreidler, McCloud, et al.), seal it up, and drop it in the mail!

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Special debate edition of Drinking Liberally on Monday

by Darryl — Sunday, 10/21/12, 1:51 pm

On Monday there will be a third and final presidential debate. And that sounds like a good excuse to get together for a pint and an opportunity to watch and discuss the debate with a veritable binder-full of fellow liberals. So please join us for another Debate Edition of Seattle’s Drinking Liberally at the Montlake Ale House on Monday evening.

Important Note: We will have sound and video for the debate. But the bar and restaurant has other customers, so the sound may not be as loud as you want, especially with the background of a busy tavern and peripheral conversations. If you are intent on hearing every word, I recommend you bring an FM radio and headsets or earbuds. Additionally, the Ale House has free WiFi for streaming audio. Ask your server for the password.

We will meet at our usual place, the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.

The Montlake Ale House opens at 5:00pm, and the presidential debate begins at 6:00pm.

I’ll be liveblogging the debate here.

We’ll still have or regular Tuesday evening gathering of liberals this week, as well. I hope you can make it to one or both events.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print
  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • …
  • 7
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 5/7/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 5/6/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 5/5/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 5/2/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 5/2/25
  • Today’s Open Thread (Or Yesterday’s, or Last Year’s, depending On When You’re Reading This… You Know How Time Works) Wednesday, 4/30/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 4/29/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 4/28/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 4/28/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Saturday, 4/26/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky @goldyha.bsky.social

From the Cesspool…

  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Wednesday Open Thread
  • lmao on Wednesday Open Thread

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

[iire_social_icons]

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.