Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. Officially, we start at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Some of us show up early for Dinner.

Tonight’s special guest will be Seattle Mayor Greg Nickles who will discuss, among other things, Sound Transit’s Prop. 1.

If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.

Obama	McCain
100.0% probability of winning	0.0% probability of winning
Mean of 369 electoral votes	Mean of 169 electoral votes

Yesterday’s analysis showed Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain by 364 to 174. With thirteen new polls in eleven states being released today, Obama gains enough electoral votes for a 100 vote victory margin. After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins all 100,000 times, and he receives (on average) 369 to McCain’s 169 electoral votes. If an election had been held today, Obama would have won with nearly 100% certainty.

Today’s big surprise poll was in North Dakota: a +2% lead for Obama in a Forum Poll from Minnesota State University Moorhead. You would be excused for viewing the poll with skepticism—the previous two polls are from mid-September and give McCain +13% and +9% leads. Even so, the result must be inducing ulcers and gnashing of teeth in the McCain Camp. I can almost hear Sarah Palin crying, “Say it ain’t so, Fargo!”

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

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

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

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

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

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

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

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

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

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

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

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

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

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

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

Today there were 17 new polls for 16 states released, but not much has changed with the electoral map, except that a new West Virginia puts Obama in the lead by +8%. On the other hand, McCain leads in a Missouri poll today–following two consecutive leads by Obama in the state.

The Monte Carlo analysis employing 100,000 simulated elections finds Obama winning every single one. Obama receives (on average) 363 to McCain’s 175 electoral votes in a hypothetical election held today.

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

For almost a year now I have been obsessively collecting state head-to-head polls for the 2008 presidential election, and analyzing the recent polls via a Monte Carlo analysis. Once a day, on days when new polls are released, I’ve published an analysis designed to address the question, “who would win if the election was held today?”

I’m going to start posting the meat of the (nearly daily) results at Horses Ass. You can always check out the full results at Hominid Views.

Think of this as a score-board for the election through the final quarter of the game.

If you want more details on the methods used to analyze the polls, rules for accepting polls, etc., check out the simulation FAQ.

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

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins all 100,000 times. In an election held today, Obama would receive (on average) 363 to McCain’s 175 electoral votes.

Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.

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

Join Goldy and me tonight for some politics under the influence, with a special Tuesday presidential debate edition of Drinking Liberally.

The debate begins at 6PM. Folks will start gathering around 5:30PM at our spot, the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Ave E., in Seattle’s Montlake neighborhood.

See ya there!

It was two months ago today, I wrote about McCain’s program to reward trolls for spreading the campaign’s message (or, as Dubya would put it…to “kind-a catapult the propaganda.”

The idea was that the McCain campaign would offer “Today’s Talking Points” to their web-savvy faithful, who would then plaster the “good news” on web sites across the land. The enthusiasm behind the “movement” and the sheer repetition of the message would gradually convert Americans into loyal McCain followers. You know…the same way the Ron Paul campaign was able to win the hearts and minds of a majority of Americans.

So…I stop back two months later, and what do I find? I find that nothing, and I mean nothing has changed on the page in two months. In particular, “Today’s Talking Points” are identical to yesterday’s “Today’s Talking Points” (yes…I checked) and are identical to “Today’s Talking Points” on every one of the dozen or so days I’ve checked the site in the last two months.

Are you surprised? You shouldn’t be. The McCain campaign’s broken (implicit) promise to offer a daily set of discussion points is another symptom of a moribund campaign that will try anything and everything that might offer a quick, low-investment advantage for the campaign. I wonder if anyone has actually received any “reward points” and whether anyone was able to cash in those points for “cool McCain stuff?”

Oh…and one of “Today’s Talking Points” that has remained unchanged for at least 60 “todays” (my emphasis)?

There are serious issues at stake in this election, and serious differences between the candidates. And we will argue about them, as we should. But it should remain an argument among friends; each of us struggling to hear our conscience, and heed its demands; each of us, despite our differences, united in our great cause, and respectful of the goodness in each other.

Seriously! That’s what it says!

But then what do you expect from a man who called his wife a “cunt” in front of aids and reporters?

6:11 PM: The Montlake Alehouse is packed with debate gawkers. I cannot connect to the wireless right now so I’m using my cell phone as a modem. Slow, slow, slow.

6:13 PM: Sarah Palin unleashes her first lie about Obama raising taxes!

6:16 PM: Has anybody figured out yet whether Sarah’s lip coloring is a tattoo? Hey…I’m not knocking it. Decorative scarification is cool…in some parts of the world.

6:23 PM: When Sarah Palin says she had to “take on those oil companies in Alaska”…does she mean that in the Biblical sense?

6:26 PM: Joe Biden agrees with Sarah’s windfall profit tax (and he points out that McCain would never go for such nonsense). Now, I suppose, the “hard left” will be slamming Biden for saying he “agrees with Sarah” too often.

6:31 PM: I think she just said, “How are we going to get there to positively affect the impacts.” But maybe she was just speaking in tongues or something.

6:33 PM: I’m watching this on CNN and they have some sort of attitudimeter on uncommitted Ohio voters, broken down by sex. (Although I though Ohioans were mostly broken down by drinking….) Anyway, women go positive when Joe starts talking, and then after a brief lag, men tag along with the women. When Sarah starts talking, women go negative and men go positive. Then the moderator interrupts. I think there is going to be an epidemic of blue-balls in Ohio tonight.

6:49 PM: I think Sarah just gave a treatise on “Diplomacy” citing her one-hour Evelyn Wood course by Henry Kissinger.

6:51 PM: Biden just mentioned McCain’s gaffe on Spanish radio, where he suggested he would not sit down with the leadership of Spain. And Sarah didn’t utter “Horseshit! Horseshit!” Man…Sarah is disappointing me here.

7:16 PM: On VP authority: Sarah says she agrees with VP Cheney. Biden says Cheney has been the most dangerous VP ever. Certainly this is true with respect to his hunting buddies!

7:28 PM: Sarah will change the tone in Washington “as [she] did in Alaska” by “appointing people regardless of party.” But, how many high-school friends does she have????

7:somethingortheother: Sarah parrots McCain in jabbing at the media (at least as I experienced it through the filter of CNN). While that kind of thing may work well for rousing the base, it seems like a really, really stupid strategy in every other way.

Post Debate: I was hoping Sarah would get asked to name the media she consumes. I’m thinking she reads both the Alaska Free Press and the Free Alaska Press.

7:45: The television screen says that CNN is going to report on the focus group reactions and result of a national debate poll soon. But they have turned down the volume and the Montlake Alehouse has erupted into a sea of boisterous conversations. So, I’ll just have to wing it and give my opinion without help from a focus group and a poll.

Basically, Biden did exactly what he needed to do. He attacked McCain without attacking Palin. He looked at her, he showed her respect, he displayed confidence and sincerity. He committed no blunders that I noticed. He was composed.

Palin? She did pretty well given her “relative youth and inexperience.” There were a few awkward moments (as one would expect for a novice). As I watched the debate, two “issues” with Palin kept gnawing at me. First, she smiled way too much and at inappropriate times. That shit doesn’t even cut it on the high school debate team (yep…I was there). It made me feel like she didn’t really understand the gravity of the moment and the position for which she has been selected.

Secondly, her answers frequently seemed canned. She had carefully prepared talking points ready to go, and she had them down pat—even when they didn’t quite fit the questions being asked. Sure…Biden was guilty of the same thing at times. But on a scale of genuineness from 1 to 10, Biden scored an 8 and Palen, a 4. But I’m a dirty fucking hippie, so what do I know.

Join me tonight for a special Thursday night edition of Drinking Liberally. We’ll all be keepin’ a sharp eye out for run-on sentences from Sen. Joe Biden and, um…any evidence at all of cognative function from Gov. Sarah Palin.

The debate begins at 6PM. Folks will start gathering around 5:30PM at our usual haunts, the Montlake Ale House,  2307 24th Ave E., in Seattle’s Montlake neighborhood.

Hope you can stop by.

Tuesday morning came and the world had survived the bail-out bust. So Goldy and friends turn to who really won the debate. Was it the cool and presidential guy or was it the snarling Pekingese guy averting his eyes? Next the panel turns to Dino Rossi, the BIAW and the new Buildergate scandal. The former Washington state Secretary of Transportation comments on Rossi’s Fantasy Transportation Plan™, the gubernatorial race, and the new Traffic Congestion Initiative (a.k.a. Lyin’ Eyman’s Initiative 985). All this and more….

Goldy was joined by Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly, former Washington State Secretary of Transportation and anti-I-985 activist, Douglas McDonald, initiative specialist Laura McClintock of McClintock Consulting, and HorsesAss and EFFin’ Unsound’s Carl Ballard .

The show is 55:34, and is available here as an MP3:

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_sep_30_2008.mp3]

[Recorded live at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. Special thanks to Confab creators Gavin and Richard for hosting the Podcasting Liberally site.]

Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. Officially, we start at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Some folks show up early to enjoy the fine cuisine.

For tonight’s activity, we’ll simply be reeling over the Buildergate scandal. No, not the Buildergate that has ensnarled Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and jeopardizes his re-election chances. Rather, the Buildergate scandal that has ensnarled gubernatorial hopeful Dino Rossi (R G.O.P. Party) and seriously jeopardizes his chances at nearly beating Gov. Christine Gregoire again, filing another lawsuit to overturn the election, and then offering another un-statesmanlike slam at the state Supreme Court in a resignation speech.

If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, McCranium should be announcing the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.

And so it goes. Washington state Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) has re-taken the lead from Dino Rossi (“G.O.P. Party”), 50% to 48%, in the latest poll by SurveyUSA. The poll of 682 likely voters was taken from 21-Sep to 22-Sep and has a margin of error of 3.8%.

So, let’s recap the September poling. A week ago, a Strategic Vision poll gave Rossi a 48% to 46% lead. Before that, a Rasmussen poll had Rossi up by a remarkable 52% to 46%. Then in early September we had an Elway poll that gave Gregoire a 49.1% to 42.4% lead and a SurveyUSA poll that had Rossi up 48% to 47%. So what is going on?

Because I’ve been systematically collecting and analyzing state head-to-head polls for every gubernatorial, senatorial and presidential race with an OCD-like fervor this election season, I’ve noticed a very strong pattern. In numerous states, for all three race types, I see examples of a Republican bump in the polls during the first half of September, only to see it fall again in the second half of September.

Call it a “Palin surge,” if you will. I call this transient phenomenon: “The Republican Awakening.” And it has largely diffused over the last week in races all over the country.

We see it here in the Washington state gubernatorial race. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it—at least until a more compelling hypothesis that better explains the data pops up. Back to the objective analysis.

Gregoire’s lead is, clearly, within the margin of error. We can empirically determine the probability that either Rossi or Gregoire would win an election held now using a Monte Carlo analysis.

A million simulated elections of 682 voters gives Gregoire 636,814 wins, and Rossi 353,324 wins. If an election had been held today, we would expect Gregoire to win with a 64.3% probability and Rossi to win with a 35.7% probability.

Here is the distribution of electoral votes resulting from the simulation.

The same SurveyUSA poll finds Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain 54% to 43%. The +11% lead is even wider than a week-older ARG poll that had Obama up 50% to 44%. And compare that to the two mid-month polls: a Strategic Vision poll and a Rasmussen poll that each gave Obama a smallish single-digit lead (+5% and +2% respectively).

See how the “Republican Awakening” thing has melted away?

Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. Officially, we start at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Some folks show up early to enjoy the fine cuisine.

If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, McCranium shoud be announcing the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.