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:

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:

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:

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?!?

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.

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).

I left my home in Redmond at 6:00 pm yesterday for a trip to a destination a little outside of the little town of Carbonado, WA. The timing was pretty good for debate listening, as the traffic on I-405 meant I would hear most of the debate without a whole lot of interference from 60 MPH road noises. I caught just over an hour of the debate, as my aural sense was required for other tasks shortly after 7:00 pm.

Listening to the debate didn’t give me opportunity to see Obama’s “big crash”. Aurally, things simply did not come off all that negative for Obama. What stuck out for me was Mitt Romney doing two things:

1. Back-peddling, flip-flopping, and pivoting away from the “severe conservative” positions he held during the G.O.P. debates. For the six or so years Romney has been running for President, he has given Americans a portrait of his positions that, oddly, differ greatly from his positions while running for Senate and while running for and being Governor of Massachusetts. Last night, the Etch-A-Sketch moment happened—Romney shook up the slate. He erased that mix of conservative, ALEC, and teabag-inspired positions that got him through the primary. Obama was dumbfounded—he probably was thinking what I was saying: “What the fuck, Mitt?!?”
2. Lying. Romney repeatedly said things that are factually false—and did so with conviction and, well…swagger! Although Obama sometimes pointed out Romney’s “erroneous” statements, I think he was caught off guard by it a bit. He was probably thinking what I was saying, “What a FUCK, Mitt!”

When I turned off the radio shortly after 7:00 pm, my impression was that Obama came off as too timid, and should have been nailing Romney MUCH harder on his Etch-A-Sketching and untruthful statements. Timidity in a debate isn’t good unless your opponent is self destructing. And Romney wasn’t acutely self destructing.

But he was undergoing a chronic self-destruction. I mean, the media isn’t going to let him get away with lying and wholesale abandonment of the positions and policies he used to get through the primary, are they? In other words, after hearing the words each candidate was saying, I was pretty convinced that Romney had created some self-inflicted damage.

I didn’t get home until about Midnight, when I did a quick scan of the news feeds, only to learn that Obama got clobbered. Devastated. Destroyed.

Alas, I had a busy morning, so I didn’t look into it too much. Later, an Obama-supporting friend of mine on the East Coast emailed me a scathing critique of Obama, starting with an, apparently, disingenuous tribute to his and Michelle’s anniversary.

Huh! That opening bit sounded warm and genuine from the right lane of SR-520.

While eating lunch today, I spent a few minutes exploring the media reaction. I think David Frum helps me understand things:

Romney, the multimillionaire, arrived in a suit, shirt and tie that looked like they’d been purchased at Macy’s. I doubt he’ll ever wear them again, but for one night, he looked the way most non-zillionaires look when they dress for business. His manner was warm, engaged, and respectful. He looked at the president when the president spoke, and his expression revealed no asperity or disdain.

Oh shit! No wonder I couldn’t clearly see Mitt’s victory…I just couldn’t see his cheap suit, and where his eyes and Obama’s eyes were pointing. (I’ve mentioned during the G.O.P. debates about Mitt’s habit of staring attentively—almost artificially so—at his speaking opponent, so I can picture that.) Apparently, if I had watched the debate with the sound turned down, Mitt would be the hands-down winner.

The only problem: there were words spoken, as well. And while I agree that Obama didn’t attack Mitt nearly as effectively as he could have, that hardly compares to lying at Americans, right in their own living rooms—or cars. Or “disappearing” his long-held controversial positions, as if they’d never “happened.”

The problem for Romney is that a victory on style is ephemeral. The debate has left behind a record in the form of words. Going forward, he can lose the cheap suit, but will still be left with all those words…and they cheapen the whole package.

Okay, so I show up at the Montlake Alehouse and Goldy is sitting here with his daughter but wearing ear buds.

“I can’t be social right now, I’m live slogging the gubernatorial debate.”

So, I decided to do the same thing. Mostly, I’m leaning over, reading Goldy’s screen and writing it here. At least until Goldy catches on.

7:15: Catch the livestream here.

7:16: I’m jumping in on the middle of things and I hear McKenna trying to claim that failure of immigration reform is not a partisan issue.

RIIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHH!

7:17: McKenna doesn’t want undocumented persons to have drivers licenses because it serves as an ID, too. Why wouldn’t we want undocumented persons to have ID?? I’ve never understood that. Shouldn’t they be able to show their landlord a picture ID like anyone else?

7:18: To carry Inslee’s point a bit further: Isn’t it better to document otherwise undocumented people so that when anyone interacts with them they have a valid way of knowing they are really interacting with who they think they are interacting with?

7:24: Inslee gets cut off by the moderator and McKenna complains that Inslee didn’t give specific examples. And then McKenna doesn’t give examples. Nice.

7:25: McKenna claims that the Inslee Plan is to raise taxes and give pay raises to his biggest donors. Yeah…that’s grounded in reality.

7:27: Inslee, twice now, suggests that McKenna is the (property) tax raiser he is the candidate who will not raise taxes. True or not, I’m not sure how credible the whole thing comes off as.

7:29: McKenna, “Drive by shooting!” Ooooh…scary. Rob tries a little “scare ’em into voting for you strategy, a la George W. Bush.

7:31: McKenna seems to be spending more time doing “meta-analysis” of what Inslee is saying than he is actually presenting his own positions. “Notice what my opponent is doing…making false accusations and….”

734: Both Goldy and I are streaming the debate on our computers. But the TV in the Alehouse has the baseball game on. Seattle is up on the Angels one to nothing.

7:35: Goldy seems to be taking this VERY seriously. I guess that’s what happens when you are actually paid to blog.

7:39: I briefly lost my feed, and now Goldy’s feed is like a minute ahead of mine! Damnation.

7:40: McKenna is on a first name basis with Mr. Blethen.

7:41: On I-1185, Inslee’s argument is weak…he should just point out that the fucking initiative is unfuckingconstitutional.

7:45: Other than a pro-environmental statement by Inslee, I can’t really find a difference between the candidates on the coal trains. (FWIW, I am pro-Coltrane, but undecided on coal train.)

7:56: It’s over. Inslee wasn’t, what I’d call, daring. He was sticking with his talking points. Since his is clearly up in the polls, that is a reasonable (if unsatisfying) strategy.

McKenna, on the other hand, came off as whining way too much. As I said, he whined about Inslee more than he actually answered questions. To me, it came off as rather pathetic.

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’s DL tonight? There are other Washington state chapters of DL meeting over the next week. The Tri-Cities chapter also meets tonight. The Spokane chapter and Drinking Liberally Tacoma meet this Thursday.

With 232 chapters of Living Liberally, including thirteen in Washington state four in Oregon and three more in Idaho, chances are excellent there’s a chapter that meets near you.

Until the end of the conventions, it was not uncommon to see a media article about how close the presidential race was at the time. If anything, the articles were based on national head-to-head polls, and generally showed Obama a point or two ahead of Romney.

Since the conventions, Obama has been gaining ground in the national polls. In fact, the last such poll that wasn’t Rasmussen that showed Romney with a lead was this Gallup Tracking poll from late August.

If you’ve followed my, or almost anyone else’s, analyses of state head-to-head polls it is no secret that Romney is in deep trouble. No matter what the national polls say, it is the electoral college (and, in a tie, the House…and, you know, sometimes the Supreme Court) that elects the President. The simulated electoral college contest has Romney losing consistently and badly this entire election season.

The reason appears to be that Obama is polling stronger in swing states. Credit for this has been attributed to a better-than-average economy in particular swing states, and to the Obama campaign’s early advertising blitz that started defining Romney even before he was the party’s nominee (and with a little help from Romney’s Republican opponents).

The other explanation, which is more of an amusement than a real explanation, is that the polls are all skewed! It’s attributed to the polling this year being “the worst it’s ever been” by political pundit and lower phalange fetishist Dick Morris.

Alternatively, it is a vast left wing media conspiracy!!!1!1! Politico has a nice write-up about Teh Great Polling Conspiracy of 2012. I think Josh Marshall summarized it best:

…having been through several of these cycles, if you’re theory is based on systemic error on the part of basically all pollsters, you’re in for a long election night.

So the following information can be read in two ways. If you think the polls, when taken en masse come out about right, on average, then I will present to you a measure of just how badly Romney is losing. If you are a Poll Truther, the following information provides solid evidence of just how skewed the polls are (if you presume Romney is really leading).

Here’s what I did. I took the results of last night’s analyses (umm…after the correction). And I reran the analysis, adding a bias in Romney’s favor to each poll included in the analysis. The bias (or skew) was a fixed percentage. I began an 0% and stepped up by 1% at a time through 10%. Here is a summary of the results for Obama’s median electoral votes with 95% confidence intervals:

The graph is clear…to eke out a win, Romney has to move the electorate across the board by a remarkable 6%. That is, he is 6% behind in the polling now. That is a larger margin than the 3.5% margin in the Real Clear Politics average of national polls. That’s because the math of the electoral college places more importance on certain states—and Romney need to do more to win those states.

To win with at least a 95% probability, Romney needs to shift things by 8%. To have the kind of lead that Obama now enjoys—with a solid 100% probability of winning—Romney needs a 10% shift.

Of course, this model is a bit simplified—I skew every poll for all states. It isn’t all states that have to be moved; rather it’s just a handful of “important states” that need moving. I mean, skewing Utah and Mississippi doesn’t really accomplish anything for Romney, and Massachusetts and D.C. aren’t going to be swung over no way, no how.

Here is the electoral map of a Romney victory scenario—presuming he moves voters in his favor by 6%:

Ohio and Pennsylvania plain gone—the polling now suggests they are out of reach for Romney even in this most extreme scenario where he shifts everything by 6%. Instead, a “Romeny + 6%” victory includes Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, New Hampshire, and New Mexico. Oh…and Nebraska-2, which is tied when we remove the skew.

I’m not suggesting the election is over. But it looks like Romney has an almost insurmountable task ahead of him if he is to leave the rolls of the unemployed.

Young Turks: on that Allen West ad.

In his own words:

The Professor and Senator Brown:

• Young Turks: Scott Brown has nothing…so he goes for TEH FORM!
• Maddow: Sen. Brown holds course with racial ploy.
• Sam Seder: Is the Scott Brown campaign desperate, or what?
• Scott Brown staffers do Indian war whoop and tomahawk chops to show their class and style.

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

The Pollster-Liberal-Media-Industrial Complex Conspiracy:

• The effect of Romney’s 47% statement on the polls (via TalkingPointsMemo).
• FAUX News Poll Trutherism—that must include their own polls showing Obama leading (via TalkingPointsMemo).
• Tweety: Poll self delusion syndrome.
• Young Turks: Dick “twinkle toes” Morris’ predictions.

MockTV: Eastwoodin’:

Jon on FAUX News’ hypocritical coverage of school lunch changes.

Latinos for Obama.

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

Good ‘ol Tommy Thompson promises to ‘Do away with Medicare and Medicaid’ (via Crooks and Liars).

Willard!

• Young Turks: The Romney Torture Memo is leaked.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Mitt Romney, “the taker”
• Gov. Romney’s record on education
• Sam Seder: Romney begs supporters to chant his name
• Flashback: Mitt Romney on harvesting companies for profits (via Political Wire).
• Thom: Mitt Romney explains Bain’s zombie economics in leaked ‘harvest’ video
• Thom and Pap: on Romney “harvesting” America’s middle class.
• Ann Telnaes: Romney says uninsured have access to health care.
• Bill Maher tries the new iPhone Romni app.
• Sam Seder: Shrub gets higher favorability than Willard!
• Mitt’s new health care plan
• Pap: Romney is mentally falling apart.
• Kimmel: on Mitt Romney’s “Too many Americans” ad.
• Maddow: Romney campaign puts the ‘mess’ in messaging.
• Mitt Romney: “Those people”.
• Maddow: Mitt Romney wonders why airplane windows don’t roll down.
• Bashir: Whose campaign is it anyway?
• Mitt Romney was an ineffective Governor.
• Jon: Mitt Romney gets dumber as election approaches.
• Mark Fiore: Willard’s World!
• Ann Telnaes: Ann Romney addresses conservative critics.
• Romney’s sorry Sunday.
• Ann Telnaes: Romney’s self-inflicted wounds.

Thom with even more Good, Bad and Very, Very Ugly.

Pap: Republicans crippled by fear.

Obama mask dance.

Crazy Akin:

• SlateTV: Todd Akin ignores dropout deadline.
• Buzz60: Todd Akin doesn’t think Clarie McCaskill was ladylike in debate.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Sen. Claire McCaskill is not “Ladylike”
• Akin TV: Tod Akin’s top ten crazy moments…and so much more.

Cenk predicts Obama will win.

Jon on The Labor Dispute (via Crooks and Liars).

Obama with some straight talk:

Mock the Vote:

• Samuel L. Jackson: Wake the Fuck Up!
• Young Turks: On Samuel L. Jackson’s video.
• OneMinuteNews: Samuel L. Jackson’s new story.
• Register and vote.
• Thom: The G.O.P. is turning in fraudulent voter registration forms.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Republican voter fraud.
• Ed and Pap: Voter suppression tactics show GOP’s desperation
• Celebrities fucken’ ROCK THE VOTE.
• Young Turks: Republicans and voter fraud.

White House: West Wing Week.

Young Turks: Rep. Gohmert’s bizarre Ottoman Empire conspiracy theory.

Sharpton: The G.O.P.’s new idea…Obama lies.

SlateTV: Social media and the Presidential debates.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.