– Great endorsement, Seattle Times.
– I think Oliver is somewhat selective, but yes, there are many areas where liberal ideas clearly are the default, for now.
– This post on Obama’s popularity in Ireland contains some of the worst puns in human history.
– Yet another Biblical family.
– Good luck to the SeaTac Fuelers who have their day in court today.
A new poll has been released for the Washington state gubernatorial contest. The Survey USA poll finds former WA-1 Congressman Jay Inslee leading Washington state AG Rob McKenna by 47% to 44%. The poll of 543 people (MOE 4.3) was taken from 12th to the 14th of October. The poll was commissioned by KING 5.
This new one makes seven consecutive polls in which Inslee leads McKenna, a streak that dates back to mid-July.
A Monte Carlo analysis with a million simulated elections using the newest poll results gives Inslee 692,593 wins to McKenna’s 296,697 wins. This suggests that, if the election was held today, Inslee would win with a 70% probability, and McKenna with a 30% chance. Here is the distribution of election outcomes from the simulation:
Inslee’s lead is not significant by standard statistical inference. Even so, the longer trajectory facilitates understanding of the state of this race:
Clearly, Inslee maintains a small, but consistent, lead in the race.
And given what a snoozer the debates have been, don’t expect any big changes in the standings.
Our next debate in tonight’s double header is AG Rob McKenna (R) versus former WA-01 Congressman Jay Inslee. I think it is supposed to be carried by KUOW, but fucking Wiretapped is on.
So, I’ll look for the debate on my portable AM/FM/Shortwave radio, and you folks can talk about the debate. In case none of us get the debate….this is just an open thread.
8:02: There is a new poll in the gubernatorial contest. Inslee leads Romney McKenna. I’ll post an analysis right after the debate.
8:06: Okay…Goldy just walked in the door and tells me I can stream the debate on KING 5. Awaiting audio…
8:09: Got the video on big screen Tee Vee and the audio streaming. Has anyone ever noticed that Rob McKenna looks like a transgendered individual?
8:11: Carl Ballard was wondering what kind of pin Inslee is wearing. A hammer and sickle pin, obviously.
8:13: [Carl] For Halloween, McKenna is going to be a skeleton with a toupee.
8:14: McKenna has some round pin with shit on the inside. If I’m not mistaken, that is the official pin of the ALEC bootcamp. Am I right?
8:18: McKenna would sink the head of the ferry system! Yikes!
8:19: Rob McKenna looks like he wants to puke. Get that man a bucket!
8:21: Rob McKenna goes to REI and that somehow is related to closing tax loopholes.
8:22: Can we get to the physical confrontation part of this debate, please?
8:27: We have enter the uberwonkery part of the debate. Jay Inslee wins just because he doesn’t whine like McKenna.
8:29: The departs from the format and they ask each other questions. Oh, please. This is bullshit.
8:30: Rob McKenna gets testy…which is as close to masculine as he gets all night…just because of the word.
8:34: McKenna is totally pro-women. But Inslee points out that there are three things missing from his answer. For example, McKenna is opposed to the reproductive parity act.
8:36: A question comes, via video tape, from a sister station in Spokane. If Washington wasn’t such a backward state, that would have been a hologram!
8:41: McKenna repeats his TOTALLY retarded pseudoissue about why we shouldn’t give drivers licenses to non-citizens. Ugggh!
8:44: “Lean management” comes up again. I think Rob wins, hands down. After all, he is much leaner than Inslee. But is pronounced moobs suggests he has a recreational drug habbit. Just sayin’.
8:47: On the other hand…Inslee would pummel McKenna, if only the physical confrontation phase of this debate would start.
8:48: Mr. Brunner looks like he could use some lean management….
8:51: McKenna “only” has “technical questions” about light rail across a floating bridge. Of course, he was previously recorded, before a group of right wing reactionaries, promising to stop the project. What an asshole!
8:55: I don’t know how much longer I can listen to this. Aaaarrrrrggggghhh! Whew…closing statements!
8:57: McKenna asks if you will better off putting the same people back in office. FUCK YES. Putting an asshole phoney like Rob McKenna in office will be an utter disaster for Washington state. No question about it!
It seems universally accepted that Mitt Romney scored a knock-out during the last presidential debate. And Mr. and Mrs. J. Q. Public seemed totally indifferent to the fact that Romney spent the debate telling blatant lies and “refudiating” the positions he had held—sometimes just weeks before—as Conservative Mitt.
Go figure!
But I guess this means anything goes!
Tonight, with a town-hall format, and with some remedial debate training, Obama is out for revenge. The fun begins at 6:00.
I’m liveblogging the mayhem from the Montlake Ale House. I suspect Carl and N in Seattle will be there, as well. If you can, please join us—in the comment thread or at the Ale House.
There will be blood!
6:00: I’m getting the audio from KUOW, but CNN is on the Tee Vee.
6:02: Romney goes all socialist on student loans.
6:06: OMG Obama is pointing down! Noooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
6:07: Obama gives “Number one”, “Number two” and “Number three” in his first answer. What a snob!
6:09: Mitt Romney has a five point plan! Doh! (Although…he may have lost some of his base going that high.)
6:09: Mitt indirectly takes credit for saving Detroit. Ignores that there was no private sector money available.
6:11: Obama is more aggressive this time. I’m sure FAUX News will say he seemed like an “angry militant” or something.
6:12: Mitt’s attempts to dominate the moderator don’t go over so well with Ms. Crowley….
6:14: Mitt is TOTALLY bullish on renewables! Uh-huh. A few minutes later: “More drilling. More pipelines.”
6:17: Obama mentions that, Mr. “Clean Coal” Romney, while governor, stood in front of a coal plant and said, “This Plant Kills.”
6:19: I think Obama wins the “production on government lands” debate. Romney was simply unaware of the “stagnant lease” issue.
6:23: Mitt goes into la-la land on his tax plan. He completely ignores the fact that THE FUCKING MATH DOESN’T FUCKING WORK. You cannot cut taxes on the wealthy as he proposes and make it up by eliminating deductions for ONLY the wealthy.
6:29: Obama: During the primary, he said “I’m going to give tax cuts to everyone, including the 1%.” He said just the opposite tonight. Mitt is the world’s fastest flip-flopper.
6:32: Obama lays out, in some detail, Romney’s 8 trillion dollars of tax cuts, but offers no details on paying for it, and then points out how Romney himself, as an investor, would never accept such a sketchy deal. Point: Obama.
6:35: “Of course my numbers add up.” Ummm…no they FUCKING DON’T.
6:35: [N in Seattle]: Gov. Romney, if it all adds up, PLEASE SHOW YOUR WORK!
6:36: Romney’s bullying isn’t working so well this time.
6:40: Romney keeps mentioning how there are more women in poverty now than when Obama took office. This completely ignores that that was Shrub’s doing. Unemployment was tanking when Obama came into office, and Obama turned it around. But like any ship, it took time. (See “Bikini Graph”)
6:45: Questioner asks Mitt about the difference between him and George Bush. Mitt is different from Shrub because he will adopt Jimmy Carter’s energy independence polity. Huh.
6:47: Mitt points out the differences…Obama points out the similarities between Mitt and Shrub. Well…some of them. He could-a gone further.
6:52: Mitt’s flaggy-flag pin is bigger than Obama’s. He wins.
6:54: Mitt: “We can’t afford four more years like the last four years.” Not really. What we CERTAINLY cannot afford is four more years like either of the Shrub four years. Those years were catastrophes that left the economy in shambles.
6:56: Mitt points out that the economy is growing more slowly this year than last. Ummm…the economy is GROWING. Under the last Republican President, the economy collapsed. That means NEGATIVE GROWTH. Any questions?
7:00: MITT Flip-Flops to become a Dream Act supporter. Holy shit…didn’t Mitt give Rick Perry SHIT in the primary for being weak on immigration for the same reason. What a fucking disingenuous asshole!
7:04: Mitt, transmorgrifies into Newt Gingrich: “I don’t want to round up 12 million people….”
7:08: Terry asks about security at an embassy in Benghazi. Obama doesn’t point out that there is no embassy in that city. (It is a Consulate.)
7:14: Obama rightly points out that the VERY DAY after the attack, he called it a terrorist attack. Mitt challenges that, and gets absolutely spanked by the moderator AND the crowd. (Bad, crowd…bad, bad, crowd.)
7:17: Questioner asks how Obama is keeping AK47s out of the hands of criminals. Obama starts out by profession loyalty to the 2nd amendment. And then says stuff…hard to follow.
7:19: There is a HUGE crowd here at the Ale House. I’m guessing 30 people here for the debate, on top of other customers.
7:23: Mitt gets cut short for not actually addressing the question about AK47s. Starts talking about hunters. FAYLE!
7:24: Obama points out that Mitt has flipped flopped on the assault weapons ban. Ouch!
7:26: Carol asks how to bring jobs home. Mitt welcomes the question…pretending that he isn’t the king of innovation in outsourcing!!!
7:28: Mitt seems to believe that business chose a “country” to be in based on tax rates. If so, you’d think that Somalia would be the business haven of the world.
7:32: Mitt, “China has been cheating.” Huh…you never did anything to encourage that behavior, did you, Willard?
7:34: Mitt’s answer on misperceptions about his disdain of the common man would be MUCH more convincing if he hadn’t been video taped telling wealthy donors that he doesn’t give a shit about 47% of Americans. Just sayin’
7:39: ITS OVER. The bloodied and battered robot Romney grabs his cheat sheet and limps off the stage….
Tonight will be another Debate Edition of Seattle’s Drinking Liberally. Please join us for an evening of political debate and conversation over a pint.
There are two debates tonight. At 6:00 pm, President Barack Obama (D) squares off against Gov. Mitt Romney (R) in a townhall format. That will be followed at 8:00 pm by a gubernatorial debate between former WA-1 Congressman Jay Inslee (D) and Washington AG Rob McKenna (R).
Note: We will have sound and audio for the presidential debate. But for the gubernatorial debate, we may have the picture, but probably no sound. Also…the bar has other customers, so the sound may not be as loud as you want, especially with the background of a busy bar and peripheral conversations. If you are serious about listening to the debate, I recommend you bring an FM radio and headsets or earbuds. Additionally, the Montlake Alehouse has free WiFi. Ask your server for the password.
We will meet at our usual place, the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E.
The Montlake Ale House opens at 5:00 pm, and the presidential debate begins at 6:00 pm. Drinking liberally normally begins at 8:00 pm, but don’t hesitate to stop by earlier for the presidential debate.
There’s be some live blogging action right here.
Can’t make it to Seattle tonight? Check out one of the other DL meetings over the next week. Tonight the Tri-Cities chapter meets. The Longview and South Seattle chapters meet on Wednesday. The Spokane chapter and Drinking Liberally Tacoma meet this Thursday.
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.
My goal for the polling analyses is to include all polls that legitimately provide insight into the race. For this reason, I want to comment on some polls that I have excluded from analysis.
As you know, I have predefined criteria on what polls can be included in my analyses. For example I exclude all on-line polls…period. And I exclude partisan polls that are selectively released. Typically this happens when a campaign releases a poll it commissioned. Even though the poll may be above reproach, including selectively released polls introduces bias to the meta-analysis of polls.
To see why, imagine a neck-in-neck race between Republican Bob and Democrat Steve. Both campaigns do polling and, quite sensibly, release those that favor their candidate. Furthermore, suppose Crossroads GPS is very interested in Bob race, so they do a bunch of polling. Steve’s campaign does a dozen polls across the campaign, and they release the six polls that show Steve with a slight lead. Bob’s campaign is a little more poll-obsessed, and they do two-dozen polls and release the 12 polls that favor their candidate. On top of that, Crossroads GPS does and additional dozen polls and releases six that show Bob in the lead.
We can assume that individual polls are above reproach. Even so, the selective release means that at a typical point in the campaign, there will be about three polls showing Bob in the lead for every poll that shows Steve in the lead. The meta-analysis will show Bob leading in a race that is, in fact, a tie.
I bring this up because I’ve had to exclude a couple of polls from my analyses.
Yesterday, Wenzel Strategies released a poll for Missouri that showed Romney leading Obama, 54.9 to 41.1. The poll appears to be legitimate and I have no reason to believe the poll is biased or improperly done. In fact, Wenzel does something I really appreciate: they publish the counts of responses in addition to the percentages. I use the counts directly whenever possible, but aside from Survey USA, most pollsters just provide rounded percentages.
The Wenzel poll was conducted on behalf of Citizens United that:
…exists to support true conservative candidates running for federal office through direct candidate advocacy and contributions, based on our in-depth candidate research and surveys.
So, it is obviously a right-leaning organization. But that is not enough to exclude an organization’s polls. For example, the Civitas Institute is a right leaning think tank in North Carolina. I include their polls, because they pre-announce the polls, and release the results regardless of the outcome.
I though the Wenzel polls were okay, because they were released on the firm’s web site. But, I wanted to be sure. I made a call to Fritz Wenzel to ask him about it. What I learned was the following:
From our discussion, I got the impression is that Mr. Wenzel is a serious pollster who takes pride in producing high quality polls for his clients. Even so, I’ll exclude this poll, since it appears to be a selective release by a highly partisan group.
Another poll I am excluding was brought to my attention by Sam Minter, for American Crossroads:
According to a new poll shared exclusively with POLITICO, Mitt Romney is leading President Obama in a congressional district in Maine — raising the possibility of the GOP nominee winning an electoral vote in a deep blue state.
The live-call poll, conducted by Glen Bolger of NMB Research and provided to POLITICO by American Crossroads communications director Jonathan Collegio, shows Obama winning statewide 48 percent to 44 percent.
That result already puts Romney in a surprisingly competitive position in a nominally blue state.
But in Maine’s second congressional district, Romney actually tops Obama 49 percent to 44 percent.
The ME-2 result is surprising but not a valid reason for exclusion. It is the selective nature of the poll’s release that results in exclusion. American Crossroads is engaging in good PR by releasing this information, but it isn’t likely to be representative of the polling overall. Granted, I did not call up the pollster, but the case for selective release seem pretty clear.
I point out these exclusions because I want to be as transparent about some decisions that may not, a first glance, be obvious.
Additionally, I’ll use this opportunity to ask for your help. If you see a poll I am including but shouldn’t, or a poll I’ve left out but should include, let me know. The best way is to make your case for inclusion or exclusion in a poll analysis comment thread.
Seriously, what is this?
The food had been served, the patrons were long gone, and the cutlery cleaned when Rep. Paul Ryan, his wife, three kids and photographers pulled up Saturday at a St. Vincent de Paul food kitchen in Youngstown Ohio.
Ryan and his wife put on aprons and washed several pans that already appeared to be clean, and then were off to the airport
I’d guess something on the order of 80% of photo ops are more waste of time than actual help. But at least the politician usually does something, even if more could be done without them. Oh, and by the way:
“We’re a faith-based organization: We are apolotical because the majority of our food is from private donations,” Brian Antol told The Washington Post. “It’s strictly in our bylaws not to do it. They showed up there and they did not have permission. They got one of the volunteers to open up the doors.
…
“I can’t afford to lose funding from these private individuals,” he said. “If this was the Democrats, I’d have exactly the same problem.”
The Seattle City Council actually does something decent.
The Seattle City Council approved new campaign finance rules today. Under the changes, candidates for local office can’t roll over campaign funds from one election to the next and can’t start fundraising until Jan. 1 of the year before an election.
Vote was 7-2 with Council President Sally Clark and Councilmember Tom Rasmussen voting no.
Council members said they took the steps to limit the influence of money on local elections and reduce the amount of time that elected officials are fundraising at the same time they’re making policy.
They’ve still given themselves the chance to transfer their money into their next election, because of course they did. But over the long run, this is a positive step to getting good challengers who aren’t scared off by the large piles of money in the incumbent’s war chests.
| Obama | Romney |
| 86.5% probability of winning | 13.5% probability of winning |
| Mean of 288 electoral votes | Mean of 250 electoral votes |
The previous analysis showed President Barack Obama leading Gov. Mitt Romney by 295 to 243 electoral votes. The Monte Carlo simulation had Obama winning 93.9% of the elections, and Romney winning 6.1%.
The polls have been trickling in over the weekend and on Monday. At press time (which really means, “start running the analysis” time I was able to dig up 16 new polls:
| start | end | sample | % | % | % | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| st | poll | date | date | size | MOE | O | R | diff |
| AZ | Rocky Mountain | 04-Oct | 10-Oct | 523 | 4.4 | 44 | 42 | O+2 |
| CO | Gravis Marketing | 05-Oct | 11-Oct | 2089 | 2.2 | 48.4 | 46.0 | O+2.4 |
| FL | Gravis Marketing | 13-Oct | 14-Oct | 617 | 4.0 | 48 | 49 | R+1 |
| FL | PPP | 12-Oct | 14-Oct | 791 | 3.4 | 48 | 49 | R+1 |
| GA | Abt SRBI | 08-Oct | 12-Oct | 706 | 5.3 | 43 | 51 | R+8 |
| ID | Mason-Dixon | 08-Oct | 10-Oct | 625 | 4.0 | 27 | 63 | R+36 |
| IA | ARG | 11-Oct | 14-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 48 | 48 | tie |
| NM | Research & Polling | 09-Oct | 11-Oct | 658 | 3.8 | 49 | 39 | O+10 |
| NC | PPP | 12-Oct | 14-Oct | 1084 | 3.0 | 47 | 49 | R+2 |
| NC | High Point U | 06-Oct | 10-Oct | 302 | — | 43 | 49 | R+6 |
| NC | High Point U | 29-Sep | 04-Oct | 291 | — | 49 | 40 | O+9 |
| OH | PPP | 12-Oct | 13-Oct | 880 | 3.3 | 51 | 46 | O+5 |
| PA | PPP | 12-Oct | 14-Oct | 500 | 4.4 | 51 | 44 | O+7 |
| PA | Muhlenberg | 10-Oct | 14-Oct | 438 | 5.0 | 47 | 44 | O+3 |
| SD | Neilson Brothers | 01-Oct | 05-Oct | 762 | 3.6 | 41.1 | 51.6 | R+10.5 |
| VA | ARG | 12-Oct | 14-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 47 | 48 | R+1 |
A big surprise from a new poll in Arizona: it gives Obama a weak lead over Romney. It seems improbable, but there you have it. There are only two current polls in Arizona, and Romney is up by +9 in the other one. Consequently, Romney would be expected to win the state with an 84% probability.
Colorado has Obama up by +2.4% over Romney in today’s poll. With eight current polls weighing in, the state is pretty close to a tie. Romney would be expected to win the state now with a 60% probability. Here is the trend:
Romney takes a +1% lead in both of the new Florida polls. Overall, he has a 87% probability of winning the state in an election held today.
We finally get an Idaho poll, and Romney leads Obama by +36%. Now we know why nobody wants to poll in the state.
Iowa is all tied up at 48% in today’s poll. But Obama leads in the only other current poll, so he ends up with a 59% chance of winning at this point.
The new New Mexico poll puts Obama up by a solid +10%—a margin right in line with the other two current polls.
There are three new polls for North Carolina, but notice that the High Point University polls include a pre-debate poll, where Obama leads, and a post debate poll, where Romney leads. He also leads in the third new poll (which is post debate). The current polls, taken together, give Romney a 97% chance of winning now. Romney has clearly recaptured the lead he held in August:
Ohio puts Obama up by +5% in today’s poll. The collection of 10 Ohio polls give Obama a +2% and 85% probability of taking the state in an election now. The long-term trend shows something of a dip in Obama’s lead, but not enough to tie up the state or give the lead to Romney.
Obama’s lead in two new Pennsylvania polls. Overall, Obama wins all ten of the current polls. That makes 37 consecutive polls that have gone to Obama, all the way back to early February.
Virginia gives Romney a +1% lead in the current poll. Romney leads in five of eight current polls and there is also a tie in one poll. Oddly enough because Obama leads more strongly in one large poll, he gets a slight overall advantage, with a 54% chance of winning an election held now.
After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 86,465 times and Romney wins 13,535 times (including the 1,003 ties). Obama receives (on average) 288 (-7) to Romney’s 250 (+7) electoral votes. Obama has a 86.5% (-7.4%) probability of winning and Romney has a 13.5% (+7.4%) 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 15 Oct 2011 to 15 Oct 2012, and including polls from the preceding 14 days (FAQ).
– I’m sure all of the reporters who were concerned about Darcy Burner’s inelegant explanation of her Harvard degree will be equally upset with Brad Toft’s makie uppie degree.
– Me too, too.
– Important news about the Northwest in national publications.
– Those who know the history of state hotline slipups involving Republican governors is clearly the greatest phrase ever.
– Happy Reloan Day, people on Kiva
Last week’s contest was won by milwhcky. It was in Pittsburgh.
This week is normally a TV show or a movie, but since I don’t watch a whole lot of TV shows and movies, I’ve managed to run pretty thin on ideas. Instead, I want to try out something new. Google maps has started to integrate their own low-level views into their maps (I’m guessing they’ll get sued by Microsoft if they call them “Bird’s Eye Views”). I’ve been checking them out and despite having less coverage, they have better picture quality and they’ve got a few far-flung places that Microsoft doesn’t have yet. When I started doing these, I really hoped that it wouldn’t be too long before much more of the world had these maps, but there hasn’t been a lot of updating recently. And I’m starting to think that Google may get there faster.
So let’s consider this one a trial run. The view below is from the Google Maps page, which is also linked from the picture itself, good luck!
[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 52:42
And thus, even as I have said, if ye are faithful ye shall assemble yourselves together to rejoice upon the land of Missouri, which is the land of your inheritance, which is now the land of your enemies.
Discuss.
Stephen Colbert: Obama’s secret martian gayness.
Mark Fiore: It’s the Foreign Policy, Stupid!.
Young Turks: “Some girls rape easy,” says idiot politician.
Colbert: The 7-11/Pizza Hut election (via TalkingPointsMemo).
Bad Lip Reading: The first debate.
Kimmel: The week in unnecessary censorship.
Sam Seder: GOP Rep. who cut embassy security funds blames Obama for embassy attack.
Young Turks: Pro-life Rep. demands abortion for his mistress.
Willard (and Eddie)!
Jon: “Fucking crazy” GOP candidates .
Richard Alley on Abraham Lincoln and the Founding of the National Academy of Sciences.
Barely Political: Redneck political coverage.
Jim Lehrer: Badass moderator.
Ann Telnaes: Child Marriage.
Rob McKenna puts his dancing shoes on.
Grandpa versus Eddie Munster:
Kid President’s guide to being a party.
White House: West Wing Week.
Slate: Rape victims have a message for Todd Akin.
Liberal Viewer: When is Stephen Colbert joking?
Lisa Brown and Maria Cantwell channel SNL for Marcus Riccelli:
Thom with the Good, the Bad, and the Very, Very Ugly.
Jon: Poll are so worthless but so quotable (via TalkingPointsMemo).
Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.
| Obama | Romney |
| 93.9% probability of winning | 6.1% probability of winning |
| Mean of 295 electoral votes | Mean of 243 electoral votes |
The Monte Carlo analysis two days ago showed President Barack Obama leading Gov. Mitt Romney by a mean of 303 to 235 electoral votes. If an election was held then, we would expect Obama to win with a 95.7% probability, and Romney with a 4.3% probability. Since Obama’s probability is greater than 95%, standard statistical reasoning would call Obama’s lead “statistically significant.”
Today there were lots of new polls released.
| start | end | sample | % | % | % | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| st | poll | date | date | size | MOE | O | R | diff |
| CA | Pepperdine U | 07-Oct | 10-Oct | 831 | 3.4 | 54.0 | 32.9 | O+21.1 |
| CA | SurveyUSA | 07-Oct | 09-Oct | 539 | 4.3 | 53 | 39 | O+14 |
| CO | SurveyUSA | 09-Oct | 10-Oct | 614 | 4.0 | 47 | 48 | R+1 |
| CO | Quinnipiac | 04-Oct | 09-Oct | 1254 | 3.0 | 47 | 48 | R+1 |
| FL | Rasmussen | 11-Oct | 11-Oct | 750 | 4.0 | 47 | 51 | R+4 |
| FL | ARG | 08-Oct | 11-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 46 | 49 | R+3 |
| FL | Mason-Dixon | 08-Oct | 10-Oct | 800 | 3.5 | 44 | 51 | R+7 |
| FL | Marist | 07-Oct | 09-Oct | 988 | 3.1 | 48 | 47 | O+1 |
| IL | Tribune WGN | 04-Oct | 08-Oct | 700 | 3.7 | 55 | 36 | O+19 |
| MA | PPP | 09-Oct | 11-Oct | 1051 | 3.0 | 55 | 41 | O+14 |
| MI | Rasmussen | 11-Oct | 11-Oct | 500 | 4.5 | 52 | 45 | O+7 |
| MI | Glengariff Group | 06-Oct | 08-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 49.0 | 42.3 | O+6.7 |
| MI | Gravis Marketing | 05-Oct | 08-Oct | 1122 | 3.2 | 46.0 | 44.4 | O+1.6 |
| MT | PPP | 08-Oct | 10-Oct | 737 | 3.6 | 41 | 52 | R+11 |
| MT | MSU-Billings | 27-Sep | 30-Sep | 477 | 5.0 | 35 | 49 | R+14 |
| NV | PPP | 08-Oct | 10-Oct | 594 | 4.0 | 51 | 47 | O+4 |
| NV | Suffolk | 06-Oct | 09-Oct | 500 | 4.4 | 46.8 | 45.2 | O+1.6 |
| NH | ARG | 09-Oct | 11-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 46 | 50 | R+4 |
| NJ | Philadelphia Inquirer | 04-Oct | 08-Oct | 604 | 4.0 | 51 | 40 | O+11 |
| NC | Rasmussen | 09-Oct | 09-Oct | 500 | 4.5 | 48 | 51 | R+3 |
| OH | Rasmussen | 10-Oct | 10-Oct | 750 | 4.0 | 48 | 47 | O+1 |
| OH | Gravis Marketing | 06-Oct | 10-Oct | 1313 | 2.7 | 45.1 | 45.9 | R+0.8 |
| OH | Marist | 07-Oct | 09-Oct | 994 | 3.1 | 51 | 45 | O+6 |
| OH | Pulse | 08-Oct | 08-Oct | 1000 | 3.0 | 47 | 46 | O+1 |
| PA | Pulse | 08-Oct | 08-Oct | 1000 | 3.0 | 47 | 45 | O+2 |
| PA | Philadelphia Inquirer | 04-Oct | 08-Oct | 600 | 4.0 | 50 | 42 | O+8 |
| VA | Rasmussen | 11-Oct | 11-Oct | 750 | 4.0 | 47 | 49 | R+2 |
| VA | Marist | 07-Oct | 09-Oct | 981 | 3.1 | 47 | 48 | R+1 |
| VA | Pulse | 08-Oct | 08-Oct | 1000 | 3.0 | 48 | 48 | tie |
| VA | Quinnipiac | 04-Oct | 09-Oct | 1288 | 3.0 | 51 | 46 | O+5 |
| WI | Pulse | 08-Oct | 08-Oct | 1000 | 3.0 | 50 | 46 | O+4 |
| WI | Quinnipiac | 04-Oct | 09-Oct | 1327 | 3.0 | 50 | 47 | O+3 |
Colorado turns red with the addition of two new polls that give Romney a +1% edge. Romney leads in five of seven current polls and has a 75% probability of taking the state now.
Three new Florida polls, also give Romney the edge. He leads Obama in five of the ten current polls, but by larger margins. Taken together, the simulation gives Romney a 76% chance of winning Florida now. Here’s the last three months:
Michigan voters seem content to supports Obama, if these three polls are representative. All five current polls go to Obama and they average out to a mid-single digit lead. The larger picture shows Obama with a pretty solid advantage:
Two new Nevada polls give Obama weak leads. In fact, Romney doesn’t lead in any of the five current polls, although one poll had the candidates tied. Taken together, Obama get a 74% probability of taking the state now.
A new New Hampshire poll goes surprisingly strongly for Romney—by +4%. The previous poll was a tie, and the oldest current poll has Obama up by a comfortable +15%. But fair warning: That poll was taken before the presidential debate! New Hampshire is definitely worth watching at this point. Here is the rather abrupt change in a picture:
Only one new North Carolina poll that puts Romney over Obama by +3%. Romney leads in three of the six current polls and all three post-presidential debate polls.
Four new Ohio polls split 3 to 1 for Obama. The President leads in 8 of 12 current polls. If the election was held now, the model predicts Obama would win Ohio with a 91% probability.
Pennsylvania is even stronger for Obama, who takes both of the new polls. Obama leads in all five of the current polls, and would be expected to win Pennsylvania now with a 94% probability.
Three Virginia polls give three results: a tie and a win for each candidate. When the current polls. are combined, Obama takes 50.4% of the pooled “votes”. And that translates into a 69% probability of winning an election right now. Here is the story in picture form:
Two new Wisconsin polls give Obama weak leads (+2% and +4%) over Romney. Obama’s lead has been cut from double digits just before the debate to about a +4% advantage. But the results give Obama a 98.4% probability of winning the state right now. The picture shows Obama with consistent lead in the state, if by a reduced margin:
When these new polls are added to the mix, the Monte Carlo analysis of 100,000 simulated elections gives Obama the win 93,914 times and Romney, 6,086 times (including the 901 ties). Obama receives (on average) 295 (-8) to Romney’s 243 (+8) electoral votes. If an election was held today, we’d expect Obama to win with a 93.9% (-1.8%) probability. Romney would have a 6.1% (+1.8%) probability of winning. By standard statistical reasoning, Obama’s lead is no longer “statistical significant.”
The long term trends in this race can be seen from a series of elections simulated every seven days using polls from 12 Oct 2011 to 12 Oct 2012, and including polls from the preceding 14 days (FAQ).
Essentially, Mitt Romney rebounded back to where he was just after the Republican convention.
Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
[Read more…]
– Yay for parks; boo for the accompanying picture that I can’t put my finger on it but creeps me out.
– No question about why these creep me out.
– Merry Christmas, Yakima.
– I would like to see some random questions from children in the next debate.
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!