HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Archives for October 2012

Seems Fair

by Carl Ballard — Thursday, 10/11/12, 5:08 pm

Even in this fairly straight AP piece reporting on McKenna’s supposed moderation, there’s this:

A political action committee funded by unions has been running attack ads with the message that McKenna is “not who he says he is.” A recent ad from the group tries to tie McKenna – in misleading or incorrect ways – to Republican positions on abortion, the national budget and health care.

I don’t have a TV, so I’ve only seen the ad once with the sound on. But it seemed more fair than not to me. The article mentions McKenna’s support of abortion rights (a better characterization might be that he knows he doesn’t have the votes to win on the issue), although abortion rights will probably be worse in the state after 4 years of McKenna than 4 years of Inslee. And the the other ones seem about right to me.

McKenna put himself, as the article notes several times, at the forefront of opposing the health care law. And while he personally only claimed to be opposed to part of it in court, that isn’t what his lawsuit argued. So he was happy to be part of that GOP extremism.

And as to the budget: well he has supported GOP budgets at the state that would have gutted education and social services. Maybe the ads should have focused on those instead of the federal budget, but they’re coming from the same place.

Finally, although the races for President and Congress will be the bigger story on election night, the races for governor will be part of that picture. And a McKenna win (or the aggregate of GOP victories at the state level including his) will be used at the federal level to argue for more restrictions on abortion and deeper cuts to social services. So maybe it’s not fair, but it is the reality.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

An now, a word from the Big Dog….

by Darryl — Thursday, 10/11/12, 10:08 am

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Special Debate Night Edition of Drinking Liberally

by Darryl — Wednesday, 10/10/12, 10:55 pm

Join us for an evening of drinks, conversation and political debate at a special Debate Night Edition of Seattle’s Drinking Liberally. The event is Thursday evening.

There are two debates to watch: the VP debate between VP Joe Biden (D) and Congressman Paul Ryan (R), followed by a gubernatorial debate between former WA-1 Congressman Jay Inslee (D) and Washington AG Rob McKenna (R).

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 VP debate begins at 6:00pm.

Note: We will have picture and audio for the VP debate. But for the gubernatorial debate, we’ll have the picture, but no sound. If you are serious about listening to the debate, I recommend you bring an FM radio and headsets or earbuds. Even the VP debate my be hard to hear with the background noise. I believe KUOW will be broadcasting the debates. Additionally, the Montlake Alehouse has free WiFi. Ask your server for the password.

I’ll be live blogging (with Carl Ballard, I believe) from the Ale House. I hope you can join us.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

On the interesting statement from Suffolk University…

by Darryl — Wednesday, 10/10/12, 9:17 pm

In the comment thread this evening, Serial Conservative asked me to comment on this:

Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos, whose polls are aggregated into mainstream averages to show where the presidential race stands in the swing states, said he’s finished polling in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia because President Obama has no shot of winning those states.

“I think in places like North Carolina, Virginia and Florida, we’ve already painted those red, we’re not polling any of those states again,” Paleologos said Tuesday night on Fox’s “The O’Reilly Factor.” “We’re focusing on the remaining states.”

It pains me to have to admit…I’m with Bill O’Reilly on this one:

Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly seemed perplexed, and asked Paleologos if he was certain those three states were already in the bag for Romney.

Here’s Mr. Paleologos’ reasoning:

“That’s right, and here’s why. Before the debate, the Suffolk poll had Obama ahead 46 to 43 [in Florida] in the head-to-head number,” Paleologos responded.
“A poor place to be for a couple of reasons. Number one, his ballot test, his head-to-head number was below 47 percent before the debate, and it’s very, very difficult when you have the known quantity, the incumbent, to claw your way up to 50. So that was a very, very poor place for him to be.

“So we’re looking at this polling data not only in Florida but in Virginia and North Carolina and it’s overwhelming,” Paleologos concluded.

Whoa…hold on there a sec, Bucky! This poll?

Obama was LEADING in Florida. Not behind. Not tied. But leading by +3%.

A straightforward reading of that evidence suggests Obama was in the stronger position. But, Paleologos felt it was bad that Obama didn’t have 50%.

Two problems. First, 46% to 43% Obama lead did not include leaners. The poll actually did assessed leaners, though, and when you include them Obama is at 48%.

On top of that, the poll included 10 additional 3rd party or independent candidates! Those candidates got 2.5% of the “votes.” So…in a close state, where the scale for the two major party candidates goes from 0% to 97.5%, the middle of the scale is 48.75%, and Obama got 48%. That’s pretty fucking close to half the available votes.

Moreover, in this poll, Obama beat Romney in favorability 51% to 45%.

Really…this “theory” by Paleologos seem pretty fucking far fetched to me.

The story is not too dissimilar in Virginia. The last Suffolk poll had Obama leading Romney, 46% to 44%. With leaners, it was a 46.5% to 44.8% race. There were three third-party candidates on the ballot that took 2.2% of the “votes” away. And, again, Obama beat Romney in favorability, 52% to 42%.

Once again, it is pretty fucking bizarre to use this poll to argue that Obama will lose the state.

And here’s the bizarre thing about North Carolina: Suffolk hasn’t done any North Carolina polling. I don’t find them in my database, RCP doesn’t have ’em either. I’ve checked with a few online polling aggregation sites, and find no evidence that Suffolk has done any polling in the state. I guess this means he is relying on other people’s polls (OPP, as we say in the biz).

So let’s look at OPP in Florida for the past two months:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Florida

A plain reading of this graph suggests that Obama took the lead from Romney by mid-September and held a pretty solid lead until the post-debate period. And then it looks pretty much like a tie. My most recent analysis gives Obama a 54.9% chance of winning the state now, based on the last six polls in the state.

And now for some OPP from Virginia over the past two months:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Virginia

Really, Virginia shows an identical pattern. Indeed, my Monte Carlo analysis puts the race in Virginia at a tie right at the moment.

And North Carolina with two months of OPP:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12North Carolina

It looks like Obama led from mid-September to late September. The two October polls give Romney the lead, for sure, but a “certain win”? Well…Romney would have a 95% probability of winning the state in an election held now, according to my analysis of this polling evidence.

I can buy an argument the Romney is likely to take North Carolina. But he has a bit of work to do before it is a “sure thing.” For Florida and Virginia, only a fool could look at this collection of evidence objectively and find a “certain” win for either candidate. These two states are very close right now. More polling is needed, not less!

So I don’t know what the hell David Paleologos was babbling about. It seems illogical. You know…an opinion that is free from being encumbered by evidence.

The worst part: I’m still creeped out by finding myself in agreement with Bill O’Reilly. I mean, what the fuck?!?

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

That’s Nice, But How About You Pay Your Taxes?

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

Mike McGinn has a post on his city blog where he thanks several companies for pitching in and helping to pay for the streetcar in South Lake Union.

Today we gathered in South Lake Union to thank four local employers who are investing $204,000 to increase service on the Seattle Streetcar. These employers – Group Health, Amazon.com, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and UW Medicine – know that more frequent service on this line is a good thing for their employees, and are stepping up to the plate to make a private investment in a public service.

Now to be clear, I’m glad they pitched in. And thanking them for it is perfectly appropriate. More frequent trips are good. And if this is the way you do it, well fine.

Fine, but not great. Because if we need more frequent trips, the city government should be able to figure out a way to pay for it that doesn’t rely on the generosity of a few large employers.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: Romney surges

by Darryl — Wednesday, 10/10/12, 3:33 pm


Obama Romney
95.7% probability of winning 4.3% probability of winning
Mean of 303 electoral votes Mean of 235 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

The previous analysis (three days ago) showed President Barack Obama leading Gov. Mitt Romney by a mean of 342 to 196 electoral votes. I was using a 21 day “current poll” window, but promised a shorter one soon. I had previously decided to switch to a 14 day “current poll” window on the 10th of this month, and that is today.

So, for comparison, using a 14 day window three days ago we had Obama leading Romney 316 to 222 electoral votes, and a 99.2% probability of winning an election held then.

Over the past three days, we have 32 new polls that cover 20 states plus each of Maine’s two congressional districts. Most of the polls are post-first-debate. Here are the details:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CO Rasmussen 07-Oct 07-Oct 500 4.5 49 48 O+1
CO ARG 05-Oct 08-Oct 500 4.0 46 50 R+4
CT Rasmussen 07-Oct 07-Oct 500 4.5 51 45 O+6
FL UNF 01-Oct 09-Oct 653 3.5 49 45 O+4
IA Rasmussen 07-Oct 07-Oct 500 4.5 49 47 O+2
LA Magellan Strategies 02-Oct 08-Oct 2682 1.9 36 59 R+23
ME Pan Atlantic SMS 24-Sep 28-Sep 400 4.9 50.8 36.8 O+14.0
ME1 Pan Atlantic SMS 24-Sep 28-Sep 200 — 52.5 35.4 O+17.1
ME2 Pan Atlantic SMS 24-Sep 28-Sep 200 — 49.0 38.1 O+10.9
MA WBUR 05-Oct 07-Oct 501 4.4 52 36 O+16
MA UMass 02-Oct 08-Oct 437 5.0 55 34 O+21
MA WNEU 28-Sep 04-Oct 440 4.7 63 33 O+30
MI EPIC/MRA 04-Oct 06-Oct 600 4.0 48 45 O+3
MI Baydoun 05-Oct 05-Oct 1122 2.9 49.3 45.8 O+3.5
MN PPP 05-Oct 08-Oct 937 3.2 53 43 O+10
MT PPP 08-Oct 10-Oct 737 3.6 41 52 R+11
NV Rasmussen 08-Oct 08-Oct 500 4.5 47 47 tie
NV SurveyUSA 03-Oct 08-Oct 1222 2.9 47 46 O+1
NH Rasmussen 09-Oct 09-Oct 500 4.5 48 48 tie
NM Rasmussen 08-Oct 08-Oct 500 4.5 54 43 O+11
NC Gravis Marketing 06-Oct 08-Oct 1325 2.9 41.2 49.9 R+8.7
ND Mason-Dixon 03-Oct 05-Oct 625 4.0 40 54 R+14
OH SurveyUSA 05-Oct 08-Oct 808 3.5 45.3 44.1 O+1.2
OH CNN/OR 05-Oct 08-Oct 722 3.5 51 47 O+4
OH ARG 05-Oct 08-Oct 600 4.0 47 48 R+1
OH Wenzel 04-Oct 05-Oct 1072 3.0 47.3 48.0 R+0.7
PA Rasmussen 09-Oct 09-Oct 500 4.5 51 46 O+5
PA Susquehanna 04-Oct 06-Oct 725 3.7 47.3 45.4 O+1.9
PA Siena 01-Oct 05-Oct 545 4.2 43 40 O+3
RI Brown U 26-Sep 05-Oct 496 4.4 58.2 32.3 O+25.9
VA PPP 04-Oct 07-Oct 725 3.7 50 47 O+3
WI Rasmussen 09-Oct 09-Oct 500 4.5 51 49 O+2

The candidates split the Colorado polls, with +1% for Obama and a +4 for Romney. The current polls split three to three between the candidates, giving Romney a very slight edge—a 53% probability of taking the state if the election was now. This is a pretty significant shift as can be seen from the polling history over the past three months:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Colorado

One new Florida poll has Romney up by +4%. Obama takes four of the six current polls and ends up with a slight edge of a 55% probability of winning now.

Obama gets another small Iowa lead, this time by +2%. He is down to an 85% probability of winning an election now. A week ago, that was a 99% probability….

Obama also holds a small +3% lead in the two new Michigan polls. That is a big drop from the double digit lead he has in the oldest current poll. Still, the evidence suggests Obama would take Michigan in an election now.

Minnesota gives Obama a double digit lead (+10%) in the only post-debate poll for the state.

Romney maintains his strong lead in Montana with this new poll.

Two very close Nevada polls taken together give Obama a very slight lead. Three of the four current polls were taken after the debate and show a very small Obama advantage. The oldest current poll gives Obama a +10%. Here is another view:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Nevada

Today’s New Hampshire poll has Obama and Romney tied up. This new poll is the only post-debate poll of the three current polls.

New Mexico gives Obama a solid +11% lead over Romney. Essentially, this is as good as Obama was doing before the Debate.

In North Carolina, Romney leads Obama by a single-digit +8.7%. Romney takes three of the five current polls, including both post-debate polls. Romney has a 95% chance in the state for an election now.

Four new polls in Ohio split between Obama and Romney. Combined with four other current polls, Obama ends up with an 86% probability in an election now. Here’s the picture:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Ohio

Obama keeps the lead in the three new Pennsylvania polls, albeit by smaller margins than he had pre-debate:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Pennsylvania

Obama leads in the latest Virginia poll. Combined with three other current polls we have a dead even race in the state. The polling history tells the post-debate story:

ObamaRomney10Sep12-10Oct12Virginia

Obama maintains a weak +2% lead in Wisconsin, where his chances in the state have dropped to 97% for an election now.

Now, after 100,000 simulated elections using a 21 day window, Obama wins 95,666 times and Romney wins 4,334 times (and he get the 347 ties). Obama receives (on average) 303 (-13) to Romney’s 235 (+13) electoral votes. In an election held now, we could expect Obama to win with a 95.7% (-3.5%) probability of winning. That is, Romney surges to a 4.3% 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 10 Oct 2011 to 10 Oct 2012, and including polls from the preceding 14 days (FAQ).

[Read more…]

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 10/10

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

– The Bill of Reproductive Rights.

– I know Brad Owen is pretty shitty. But Democrats who don’t like him should have put some effort into a primary challenge instead of supporting a Republican.

– Romney Proudly Explains How He’s Turned Campaign Around ‘I’m Lying More,’ He Says

– The headline style of the Baptist Press, on the other hand calls for them to capitalize only the first word, followed by lying nonsense pretending that contraception and abortion are the same thing.

– Lord Player is now Archbishop Poopypants

– What could go wrong?

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Drinking Liberally — Seattle

by Darryl — Tuesday, 10/9/12, 3:30 pm

Please join us tonight 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.



Can’t make it to Seattle tonight? Check out one of the other DL meetings over the next week. Tonight the Tri-Cities and Vancouver, WA chapters meet. On Wednesday, the Bellingham chapter meets, and Thursday night Drinking Liberally Bremerton meets. And on Monday, the Yakima and Olympia chapters meet.

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

You Might Think

by Carl Ballard — Tuesday, 10/9/12, 8:01 am

That if you were reading The Seattle Times’ endorsement of Rob McKenna, and you came across this paragraph:

McKenna has an independent mind. He is willing to work with Democrats and he is willing on occasion to buck his party. He defended Washington’s top-two primary before the U.S. Supreme Court, despite pressure from his own party seeking to overturn it. And he won.

You might reasonably say to yourself that they got the bucking his own party bit out of the way, so it’s time for an example of him working with Democrats. The next paragraph will surely mention the vast amounts of working with Democrats he did.

No?

It’s just an awkward transition to complaining that Democrats have mentioned that he’s a Republican. OK then.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Where Is This Coming From?

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 10/8/12, 7:26 pm

I can only think of two reasons that Reagan Dunn has decided to make an issue of the end of the free ride area a week after it ended and several months after the decision was made. First: he thinks it’ll be to some advantage in his AG race against Bob Ferguson. Second: poor people are now getting services in his district and it’s scaring his constituents.

I suppose you could make an argument that he’s doing it because he cares about the issue. If you decide to make that argument, you’ll have to explain why he’d start to push it now. Why he thinks there ought to be a discussion after the policy is a done deal, voted on, passed and implemented. Why previously his problem with the policy was that there wasn’t a vote on the car tabs part.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Open Thread 10/8

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 10/8/12, 1:12 pm

Sorry this is so late.

– The New Southpark bridge is more than half way done.

– Liberals, don’t panic after one debate.

– Jack Welsh proves no matter how good at business you are, you can still say dumb things.

– Why does anyone want to be a Boy Scout anymore?

– Walking and biking improvements in the city budget are starting to look like they may be in the final product.

– I really liked Elementary, so far, but I fear it’s going to be murder every week. One of the things I like about the original Holmes stories is that there was a mix of types of mysteries (it’s one reason to have him not be a police officer with a particular beat) and so far that hasn’t been the case.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Poll Analysis: The post-debate polls trickle in

by Darryl — Sunday, 10/7/12, 2:39 pm


Obama Romney
100.0% probability of winning 0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 342 electoral votes Mean of 196 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

A rather paltry 15 new polls covering 10 states have been released since my previous analysis. What makes this new batch of polls interesting is that most of them are post-first-debate polls. And looking at them, it’s clear that Romney will get either a boost or a bump from the polls. (My prediction was that Romney would get an acute advantage, but a long term disadvantage from the debates—it’s simply to early to test that prediction.)

Here are the polls, including some in seven or eight swing states:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CO U Denver 04-Oct 05-Oct 605 4.0 47 43 O+4
CO Gravis Marketing 03-Oct 04-Oct 1438 2.8 45.9 49.4 R+3.5
CO McLaughlin 30-Sep 02-Oct 300 5.7 46 50 R+4
CT Quinnipiac 28-Sep 02-Oct 1696 2.4 54 42 O+12
FL Rasmussen 04-Oct 04-Oct 500 4.5 47 49 R+2
FL WeAskAmerica 04-Oct 04-Oct 1200 3.0 46 49 R+3
HI Civil Beat 26-Sep 28-Sep 1684 2.4 62 30 O+32
MO Rasmussen 02-Oct 02-Oct 500 4.5 46 49 R+3
NV Gravis Marketing 03-Oct 03-Oct 1006 3.1 48.9 47.8 O+1.1
NM PPP 02-Oct 03-Oct 778 — 52 43 O+9
OH Rasmussen 04-Oct 04-Oct 500 4.5 50 49 O+1
OH WeAskAmerica 04-Oct 04-Oct 1200 3.0 46 47 R+1
VA Rasmussen 04-Oct 04-Oct 500 4.5 48 49 R+1
VA WeAskAmerica 04-Oct 04-Oct 1200 3.0 45 48 R+3
WI PPP 04-Oct 06-Oct 979 3.1 49 47 O+2

Before the debate, Obama had lend in 5 consecutive Colorado polls, but by margins of from 3% to 6%. Now Romney takes two of the three new polls and three of nine current polls (currently defined as polls taken in the past three weeks). Obama’s goes from winning 97% to 91% of the simulated elections.

In Florida, Romney leads Obama in two new post-debate polls, albeit by small margins. With fourteen current polls, and the fact that two polls aged out—one that barely went to Romney and one that was weak for Obama—there is almost no difference in the projected outcome of an election held now for Florida.

In Missouri, Romney leads Obama by +3%, his smallest lead of the current polls. That causes his chances to drop from 100% to 99.9% in the state.

Obama barely leads in the new Nevada poll. The +1% is his weakest showing of the current polls, except for one late September tie. His chances drop from 99.5% to 99.2% as a consequence.

No sign that New Mexico is flipping over to Romney. Obama’s +9% lead is right up there with three other polls that were from +9% to +11%.

Two new polls in Ohio split between the candidates, and by +1% each. The WeAskAmerica poll is the only current poll, of ten, in which Romney leads. Obama still wins 100% of the simulated elections.

Romney take two of two Virginia polls. Prior to these polls, Romney lost 13 polls in a row, dating back to early September. But with Obama leading in the eight other current polls, his chances have dropped from 100% down to 99%.

Wisconsin is still in Obama’s column after the debate gives Obama a rather weak lead over Romney by +2%. This is Obama’s weakest showing among the current polls, but he still takes 100% of the simulated elections.

Now, after 100,000 simulated elections informed only by state head-to-head polls, Obama wins 100,000 times and Romney wins 0 times. Obama receives (on average) 342 to Romney’s 196 electoral votes over the simulated elections. These are the identical numbers we had before. The results suggest that for an election held now, Obama would have a 100.0% probability of winning.

Of course, the very abrupt change in momentum that we may end up seeing in the aftermath of the first debate is not fully represented in this analysis. My three week polling window smooths the results over three weeks. (The window will shrink to two weeks very soon.)

We can assess the race with less smoothing by shrinking that window. In the following table, I’ve shrunk the window a number of times. The results clearly show that Romney has gained the initiative in the short run, even if he still is the probable loser in an election held now:

Window
O-prob
R-prob
O-EV
R-EV
21 Days
100%
0%
342
196

14 Days

99.2%
0.8%
316
222
7 Days
94.5%
5.5%
299
239
5 Days
77.5%
22.5%
285
253
3 Days
90.7%
9.3%
293
245

Current poll windows below five days tend to start reversing the trend. Fewer polls become included as “current polls”, which means more older polls then get averaged in (at least with the modest pace of polling right now).

Romney’s peak chances occur by assuming only the post-debate polls, when available, should be used—that is, any prior strengths or weaknesses observed through polling in the recently polled states is entirely discarded. Romney peaks out at a 22.5% chance of winning an election held now under that scenario.

The long term trends in this race can be seen from a series of elections simulated every seven days using polls from 07 Oct 2011 to 07 Oct 2012, and including polls from the preceding 21 days (FAQ). Even with a small handful of post-debate polls, we see Obama’s momentum stopped, and the uncertainty in outcome increased (that is, there is more spread between upper and lower 95% limits) .

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

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Bird’s Eye View Contest

by Lee — Sunday, 10/7/12, 12:00 pm

Last week’s contest went unsolved was won by wes.in.wa yesterday! It was in Dundee, Scotland.

This week’s is another random location somewhere on earth, good luck!

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

HA Mormon Study

by Goldy — Sunday, 10/7/12, 7:00 am

[HA Bible Study is on hiatus through the November election as we honor Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney by studying the scriptures of his Mormon religion.]

Doctrine and Covenants 132:61-63
If any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.

And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed;

Discuss.

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print

Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!

by Darryl — Saturday, 10/6/12, 1:05 am

Liberal Viewer: Fox News lies about Libya attack response?

Thom: Right Wingers and the poll truthers.

Jonathan Mann: The Romney Shake It Up Song:

Thom and Pap: Koch front group seeks revenge against Florida Justices.

Debate:

  • Ann Telnaes: Romney shapes up for the debate
  • Jonathan Mann: Romney fires Big Bird:
  • Mitt’s debate: Mostly fiction.
  • Kay and Peele Luther on Obama’s first debate performance.
  • Jimmy Fallon joins the debate
  • Obama: Mitt was fact checked by his OWN CAMPAIGN! (via TalkingPointsMemo.)
  • Young Turks: Advice for Obama’s next debate.
  • Ann Telnaes: No mention of the 47% in first debate.
  • MockitTV: Obama and Romney make America great again
  • Young Turks: Why did Obama lose the first debate?
  • Big Bird responds.
  • Thom: Hey, Media, how can Romney lie all night and be “the winner?”
  • Sam Seder and Ari Berman: Mitt lies his way to a debate victory.
  • Mitt Romney: Protect big oil, fire Big Bird
  • Susie Sampson’s Tea Party Report: Debate!
  • Tweety and Louis Black: The day after the Denver debate
  • Conan: Mr. Romney and Mr. Bird.
  • The great Mitt Romney cheating conspiracy theory (multiple videos).
  • Maddow: History favors the challenger in first debates
  • Young Turks: Did Mitt cheat?
  • Sam Seder: No mention on 47% in the debate.
  • Stephen praises FAUX News for something important.
  • Martin Bashir: The two faces of Mitt Romney and John Sununu’s ugly remarks
  • Young Turks: Breaking down the debate.
  • Health care: Out of luck.
  • Ed and Pap: Republicans full of “Dog Hope” after debate
  • Tweety unloads over Obama’s performance (via TalkingPointsMemo).
  • Lawrence O’Donnell: Nobody won!
  • Young Turks: Some lies during the debate.
  • Jon: The Debate (via Political Wire).

Thom: More Good, Bad, and Very, Very Ugly.

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA):Evolution, Big Bang ‘Lies straight from The Pit Of Hell’

Thom with some Good, Bad, and Very, Very Ugly.

Romney flip flops on his 47% comment!?!

George Takei: “We’ve got to be actively involved in the electoral process.”.

G.O.P. Voter Suppression:

  • Zina Saunders: Daryl Metcalfe Says You Don’t Deserve To Vote!.
  • Maddow: US court forces Ohio to reinstate early voting
  • Gavin Newsom with Rosario Dawson: Disenfranchised Latino vote is a major problem.
  • Sam Seder: PA Judge blocks GOP voter ID law
  • Maddow: Mixed messages on voter ID as Pa. slow to obey court
  • Mark Fiore: Voting with Right Wing Ralphie.

Steve Martin, home crafts expert, makes an endorsement:

White House: West Wing Week.

Thom: Has the GOP/Right Wing Media Jumped the Shark?

TEH NEW TRUFERISM:

  • The crackpot Jobs Numbers Truferism movement emerges. (via TalkingPointsMemo).
  • Maddow: Good jobs news drives right to delusion
  • Young Turks: The unemployment rate ‘conspiracy’
  • Romney campaign resists FAUX News’ Job Report Truferism (via TalkingPointsMemo).
  • Sam Seder: The Right Wing freak-out over jobs numbers.
  • The politics behind the jobs numbers

Ann Telnaes: The Supremes begin a new term.

Sam Seder: Rick Santorum Rick Santorum wants to kill and eat Big Bird.

Mitt Romney’s Disdain For The Middle Class: He Said It, He Meant It.

Young Turks: Tucker Carlson makes a fool of himself over 2007 Obama speech.

Thom with The Good, The Bad, and The Very, Very Ugly.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here (via TalkingPointsMemo).

Share:

  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Print
  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Friday, Baby! Friday, 5/9/25
  • 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

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…

  • Vicious Troll on Friday, Baby!
  • Vicious Troll on Friday, Baby!
  • Vicious Troll on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Vicious Troll on Wednesday Open Thread
  • 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

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.