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 cuisine.

For tonight’s activity, we’ll brainstorm on ways to shuffle and funnel money to create multiple shadowy front groups that will bankroll Swift-Boat attack ads against Rossi. You know… they’ll smear him as a Republican in “G.O.P. Party” clothing:

Tonight’s theme song comes from Seattle’s Winlar (appearing at the Jewel Box Theater this Friday at 8pm):

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

A new poll in the Washington state gubernatorial race between Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) and Dino Rossi (“G.O.P. Party) has been released by Elway Research. I mentioned the poll in yesterday’s poll round-up, but I had not seen the full report.

It turns out the polling was somewhat complex. The poll sampled 450 registered voters between 6-Sep and 8-Sep. The overall margin of error is 4.5%, although in the most interesting analyses, they split samples in half, giving a margin of error within a group of 6.5%.

Elway split the sample into two groups. Group one was asked to chose between “Republican Dino Rossi” and “Democrat Christine Gregoire.” Group two was asked to chose between labels as they appear on the Washington state ballot. That is, they were asked to chose between Rossi, “who prefers the GOP party” and Gregoire, “who prefers the Democratic party.”

Subgroup one gave Gregoire a 50% to 41% lead over Rossi. Group two gave Gregoire a 48% to 44% lead. With a 6.5% margin of error, the differences in these findings are nowhere near achieving statistical significance. In other words, the differences between the two subgroups could simply reflect sampling error.

Just for fun, let’s analyze these as separate polls and combine them later. As usual, I use a Monte Carlo analysis, consisting of one million simulated elections, drawing from the polled population.

The weakest results for Gregoire come when Rossi is introduced as preferring the “G.O.P. Party.” Following a million simulated elections, Gregoire wins 660435 times and Rossi wins 321369 times. This suggests that, if the election was held now, Gregoire would have a 67.3% probability of beating Rossi. Here is the distribution of vote outcomes from the simulations:

When Rossi is called a Republican, his chances go down a bit. Now, after a million simulated elections, Gregoire wins 834,999 times and Rossi wins 153,178 times. This subsample, treated as its own poll, gives Gregoire an 84.5% of defeating Rossi (if the election were held now).

I would argue for using both samples. First, because the difference is not significant. It may be that Washington voters react negatively to Rossi as a Republican. Or not. The sample size was not sufficient to statistically support the idea. Secondly, because I have a difficult time believing that come November the voters will not think of this as a race between the state’s top Democratic candidate and the state’s top Republican candidate.

In the pooled analysis Gregoire wins 838,346 times. Rossi wins 153,042 times. If the election were held now, based on this poll alone, Gregoire would have an 84.6% probability of defeating Rossi. Here is the distribution:

Let’s consider one more permutation. The new Elway poll actually falls between two other recent polls, so lets pool all the recent polls. The recent Rasmussen poll was conducted on 10-Sep. It gave Rossi a 52% to 46% lead over Gregoire. And the slightly older SurveyUSA poll was conduted from 5-Sep to 7-Sep. It gave Rossi a 48% to 47% lead over Gregoire.

When the Elway results are pooled with the Rasmussen and SurveyUSA results, Gregoire wins 451,469 times and Rossi wins 541,349 times. In other words, these recent polls suggest that, if the election were held now, Gregoire would have a 45.5% probability of winning and Rossi would have a 54.5% probability of winning.

<

One final note. In my previous analysis of this race I pointed out that both the SurveyUSA and Rasmussen “polls show a surprising decline in Obama’s standing against McCain—a post-convention decline that is larger than anything I’ve seen in other blue states.” The suggestion was that, perhaps, both polls, by chance, drew samples that were favorable to both Rossi and McCain. There were some hints of this in the cross-tabs of both polls (like a surge in women chosing McCain in the Rasmussen poll).

The Elway poll lends a bit more support for the idea. In a McCain–Obama match-up, Obama came out ahead of McCain, 45% to 38%. The +7% advantage for Obama is more in line with other polling than is the +2% found in the Rasmussen poll and the +4% found in the SurveyUSA poll.

But without additional evidence, I’m forced to take the pooled results and giving Rossi a very narrow lead over Gregoire right now.

(Cross posted at Hominid Views.)

The rematch of the Washington state gubernatorial race has seen Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) holding a small, but consistent, lead over Dino Rossi (“G.O.P. Party”) from early in the year through August. Now, with less than two months to go to the general election, Rossi has “surged” to a modest September lead.

A new Rasmussen poll gives Ross a 52% to 46% lead. The poll of 500 likely voters was taken on September 10 and has a margin of error of ±4.5%.

This is the second consecutive polling lead for Rossi. A few days ago, a SurveyUSA poll gave Rossi a 48.2% to 47.4% lead over Gregoire.

The +6% lead in this new poll is Rossi’s strongest performance since November, 2006:

What is the probability that either Rossi or Gregoire would win an election held now? As usual, I’ll use a Monte Carlo approach to address the question.

After one million simulated elections, we find that Gregoire wins 166,063 times and Rossi wins 825,788 times. If the election was held now, we would expect Rossi to have an 83.3% probability and Gregoire a 16.7% probability of winning.

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

Given that we have two polls taken back-to-back, it is worth combining the SurveyUSA poll (taken 5-Sep to 7-Sep) with the Rasmussen poll (taken on 10-Sep).

The resulting analysis gives Gregoire 226,762 wins to Rossi’s 766,697 wins. The combined polls suggest that, if an election was held now, Rossi would win with at 77.2% probability and Gregoire would win with a 22.8% probability:

Is the lead real? There is a reasonable possibility it is—the probability of two consecutive statistical outlier polls is pretty small.

On the other hand, consider this: both recent polls also show McCain doing better against Obama than anyone could have reasonably expected. The Rasmussen poll in Washington state gives Sen. Barack Obama a narrow 49% to 47% lead over Sen. John McCain, and A few days earlier, a SurveyUSA poll offered Obama a 49% to 45% lead over McCain:

Both of these polls show a surprising decline in Obama’s standing against McCain—a post-convention decline that is larger than anything I’ve seen in other blue states. So…maybe the lead is real. (More polls, please.)

In any case, given that the polling now has him ahead, can somebody please ask Dino to wipe that sublime grin off of his face? It’s just looking creepy these days.

(Cross posted at Hominid Views.)

To start, the panel ponders the political Palinolithic era. Is “pathological liar” too strong a phrase? Would an actuary predict a probable Palin presidency? Did Palin add a punch to the post-convention polls? The panel next takes on some Washington state issues, like who is the real Rossi and would the public really respect (or even recognize) him if they knew him? And with the incredible shrinking media, could that even happen? ’Sup with the Supreme Court and I-960? And what’s the (non-) deal with the Boeing strike?

Goldy was joined by Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly, Executive Director of the Northwest Progressive Institute Andrew Villeneuve , HorsesAss and EFFin’ Unsound’s Carl Ballard and Peace Tree Farm’s blogging pioneer N in Seattle. Oh…they even permitted me a few words.

The show is 54:11, and is available here as an MP3:

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_sep_9_2008.mp3]

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

A new poll in the Washington state gubernatorial race has Dino Rossi (“G.O.P. Party”) leading Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) for the first time since February.

This race is a rematch of the 2004 contest that Gregoire won 133 votes out of 2.8 million votes.

The SurveyUSA poll sampled 658 people. Gregoire received 47.4% support, Rossi received 48.2% support, 2.9% preferred another candidate, and 1.5% were undecided. The poll was taken between the 5th and 7th of September, on the heels of the Republican National Convention that ended on September 4th. The poll’s margin of error is ± 3.9%.

Prior to this poll, Rossi had not held the lead for fifteen consecutive polls, stretching back to late February. One July poll had found the race tied.

Clearly, Rossi’s new lead is well within the margin of error. Even so, the evidence offered by this poll gives Rossi a higher probability of winning. (All statisticians mean by “statistical tie” is that the poll leader’s probability of winning is less than 95%.)

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 gives Gregoire 440,892 wins and Rossi 548,161 wins. These results suggest that, if the election were held now, Rossi would have a 55.4% probability of winning and Gregoire would have a 44.6% probability of winning.

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

The poll results could reflect a couple of things. The obvious possibility is that Rossi has benefited from a post-convention bounce. Or maybe a post-convention bump—time will tell. The bounce/bump possibility is supported by the observation that the same poll found the race between Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain tightened-up to a narrow 49% to 45% lead for Obama. The previous poll was the August SurveyUSA poll that gave Obama a stronger 51% to 44% lead.

The second possibility is that this is a post Democratic Convention bounce for Rossi. The Rossi campaign ran advertisements that sandwiched Obama’s acceptance speech, offering Rossi’s local version of Obama’s message of change.

This leads one to wonder…Given Rossi’s implicit endorsement of Obama’s theme, will he vote for Obama in November? Don’t bother asking him, though. It’s probably not an issue he wants to talk about.

(Cross posted on Hominid Views.)

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 for Dinner.

For tonight’s activity, we will sit in the central circle and share our Sarah Palin dreams/nightmares followed by an angry flag-disposal ceremony, and capped off by a round of Kumbaya.

Tonight’s theme song might well be one interpretation of a McDream:

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.

Goldy and panel ponder the important questions of our time: Was the Sarah Palin choice crazy or simply reckless? (And should the words “Palin” and “choice” ever appear together in the same sentence?) Will the Republicans get any real mileage out of the flip-floppin’, tax-increasin’, book banin’, enemy firin’, ear markin’ half-term Governor? Where was the Seattle media at the Democratic National Convention? And why was The Big Tent such a spectacle? Did anybody show up for the Republican National Convention and, if so, who will be the target of their anger frenzy this year? Is Joe Lieberman a traitor? And why are Washington state Republicans shunning their own Convention?

Goldy was joined by Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly, Executive Director of the Northwest Progressive Institute Andrew Villeneuve , HorsesAss and EFFin’ Unsound’s Carl Ballard and HorsesAss, EFFin’ Unsound, and Blog Reload’s Lee.

The show is 48:07, and is available here as an MP3:

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_sep_2_2008.mp3]

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

Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. We begin at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E, but some of us will be there early for Dinner and to watch the Republican National Comedy show.

Tonight’s activity is a contest to turn this flow chart into a board game:

Tonight’s theme song could only be Sarah Smile by Hall and Oats:

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.

Geov and I were making our way down the pedestrian mall from one convention site to another the other day. The hot Denver sun enticed us to take one of the free shuttles that runs up and down the mall. We waited.

It seems the shuttles were temporarily shut down—perhaps something important was happening. We inspected the relatively quiet landscapes for a sign. Minutes later something stirred down the road.

It was a pro-McCain march. And a law abiding bunch of marchers they were, too. As the marchers waited for the light to change, Geov and I snapped photos and debated whether there were more marchers or more bicycle police. (Really…you can see the entire “rally” in the photo.)

Some people waiting for the shuttle next to us started chanting “Four more years! Four more years!”

That prompted one of the bicycle cops to swing around in front of our shuttle stop. He looked at our group through those menacing dark glasses and asked, “Did somebody say ‘four more beers?'”

There is no secret about it, our soldiers are not treated with the dignity they deserve. The shoddy treatment includes deployment extensions and stop-loss orders that add both length to and uncertainty in dwell times. Extensions and stop-loss are tools that the Administration chose for executing Bush’s Big Military Adventure.

Sober planning for the war and, especially, the post-war period should have dictated a national sacrifice: taxes to fund the war (and the right equipment), a draft to put the required number of boots on the ground, and a concerted effort to fund and provide quality services to our newest veterans. But Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld tried to do it on the cheap, and our soldiers and veterans shoulder the burden.

The Walter Reed tragedy provided gut-wrenching documentation of the disgraceful treatment our veterans received under the “stewardship” of the Bush administration. But for every Walter Reed story, there are numerous other outrageous stories of veterans and soldiers denied the basic medical and (especially) mental health services they need.

This afternoon I attended a meeting of the Veterans and Military Families Caucus at the Democratic National Convention. There were two panels comprised largely of veterans: Major general Scott Gration USAF (Ret.), Colonel Dick Klass USAF (Ret), Command Sergeant Major Michelle Jones USAR (Ret), Lieutenant Colonel John Medve USA (Ret), Sergeant Major John Estrada USMC (Ret), among others.

The mood in the room was not one of anger (say, the the kind of anger you get from bloggers like me who are outraged over the fraud perpetuated on our country by the Bush administration). There were no “swift boat” attacks on McCain from the panel. Rather, the mood was one of disappointment, hope for the future, and determination.

McCain’s record on military and veterans issues was vetted by the panel, not in anger but in disappointment. The bottom line was summed up by one panelist: “McCain doesn’t listen.” A man who should be in a position to offer leadership on military and veterans issues has been AWOL far too often. A high-profile example is last year’s Webb amendment that required periods of rest and recovery between deployments. McCain voted against the amendment. Another example…in May of 2006, McCain voted against a bill that provided an additional $20 million for medical facilities for veterans. Veterans and their families noticed these votes with disapproval and disappointment.

Much of the panel discussions were about the positive things Obama would do for soldiers, their families and veterans. Folks were quick to note that the very first committee Obama joined as a freshman Senator was the Veterans Affairs Committee. Likewise there was grateful acknowledgment and praise for Michelle Obama’s genuine interest in the families of soldiers (and these folks seemed to make up a large proportion of the audience). Barack and Michelle have listened to soldiers, their families, and vets. (If you want more information on Barack Obama’s positions on the military issues, BTW, check out his recent interview with Stars and Stripes.)

I’ve dropped in on a few of these meetings over the last two days. This one was different, and I found it personally very compelling and even, dare I say, emotional. The Veterans and Military Families Caucus meeting transcended “politics as usual.” It was an authentic dialog among people deeply concerned about America and her warriors. They expressed a genuine hope in an Obama presidency—hope for change that we owe to veterans, soliders, and their families after eight years of recklessness and abuse.

Credentials. It seems like everyone in Denver is wearing a few around their necks. Not only do they act as passes to get you into buildings and events, but they function as status symbols in a village that has sprung to life over a weekend. They are not unlike boy scout badges, military medals, or feathers in ones cap; they frequently serve as conversation starters. The can be a choking hazard.

The first convention-related thing Goldy and I did was to embark on a quest for credentials. We took light rail to the Sheridan Hotel in Denver where media credentials were distributed and got in line for our blogger credentials.

With credentials come bags (typically canvass bags) filled with advertisements and goodies. Lots and lots of goodies. Obviously the goodies are given away in hopes of some return. The goodie suppliers for the press bags might have been hoping for some product placement. But I don’t see United Parcel Service getting anything out of me for putting those delicious little mints in my bag.

As bloggers, we’re not quite treated with press status and as bloggers embedded with the state delegation, we’re not treated with delegate status (except we do get all the goodies—did I mention that ProLogis also put some refreshing mints in my bag?). We do get some of the privileges of each status, however. For instance, our blogger credentials came with a coveted floor pass in the Pepsi Center, with a seat, an ethernet connection, and a single power outlet reserved for us among the Washington state delegation. Sweet. That’s much better access than most members of the press receive.

Goldy and I also visited the “Big Tent” for a credential. The “Big Tent” is an independent facility set up by bloggers for bloggers (specifically, it is hosted by Daily Kos, Alliance for a Sustainable Colorado, and Progressnow.org). It serves as blogger central, with wireless internet, power, table space, food, beer, couches and even entertainment.

Goldy was able to score one credential for the Big Tent, but a little creative credential-swapping got all three of us access for the day. (I feel it is only proper to take a moment to thank the New Belgium Brewery for all the free beer they gave me in the Big Tent last night. I especially enjoyed their 1554 Enlightened Black Ale, which is new to me, but has worked its way up to my “preferred microbrews” list.)

The Bit Tent was wonderful, but a bit trying. The tables were crowded together, it was dark, hot, and the air was a little thick with…well, blogger. When the room thinned out later in the evening, however, it was great. There was plenty of lukewarm pizza and refreshing New Belgium Brewery products on tap late into the evening.

This convention is “distributed” among two main sites, and numerous smaller venues. The Pepsi Center is where the big events take place during the evening. A couple of miles away, at the Convention Center, there are numerous events going on during the day. As Geov and I made our way from the Pepsi Center to the Convention center yesterday afternoon, we met a couple of lads from Atlanta. They were filming content for their web-tv program (I don’t have the card on me, but I’m sure I’ll plug it when they actually get their web site up.) They arrived in Denver lacking any credentials, and were capturing on video their quest to secure credentials…any credentials. Just by asking.

By yesterday afternoon, they had only managed to score a “Big Tent” press credential. That’s right..the Big Tent folks created a class of credential called a “press credential.” As you might imagine, it is a totally second class credential that requires a staff escort, and gives no access to the pizza or those delicious New Belgium Brewery products.

At the Convention Center, Geov and I inquired about blogger facilities and were sent to the “Specialty Media Lounge,” where we signed in and were given another badge to hang around our necks. The Specialty Media Lounge is sponsored by Microsoft.

I returned to the Convention Center today, thinking my blogger credential would get me through the “credentialed press door” and avoid the long security line. Nope…the blogger credential didn’t work, but my Specialty Media Lounge tag did. Go figure.

So I am now writing this in the comfort of the Specialty Media Lounge. The room has a low population density compared to the Big Tent, it is air conditioned and well lighted. There is no 1554 Enlightened Black Ale, but plenty of conference center coffee, and piles of boxed lunches. There is a Microsoft Zune kiosk for the curious, and a Microsoft XBOX 360 station for the playful. I’ve yet to see anyone use the XBOX, but the thought was nice. Knowing geeks they way they do, Microsoft kindly provided a big basket of munchies on each table. (Dang…someone just grabbed the bag of M&M Peanuts I was eying. I’ll have to settle for a bag of Miss Vickies Hand-Picked Jalapeno chips.)

I’ve finished my free lunch (thanks Microsoft!) and raised my blood-caffeine titer to acceptable levels. I’m ready for my next challenge in CredentialQuest™.

Just after 5:00 pm Pacific time, Nancy Pelosi has called the convention to order—even in this atmosphere of festive disorder. A few minutes into her speech, she is clearly in the role of attack dog, and going after John McCain. “John McCain is Wrong,” she has the crowd chanting in unison.

The “John McCain is Wrong” part reminds me of that “priceless” McCain speech with the green backdrop. You remember that one…where McCain kept saying “And that’s not change we can believe in,” followed by a sheepish grin and a nasally, McGooish laugh. The difference here is that nobody is sheepish (but they are all grins). There is nothing but enthusiasm and, dare I say it, unity. Yes, I know, there is supposed to be disunity, especially among the Washington delegation (with whom I am sitting). While I ‘m sure there are some bitterly disappointed Clinton supporters around, there is most certainly a unity of feeling at the convention that America cannot afford a McCain presidency.