HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Search Results for: 10,000

DUI Updates

by Lee — Saturday, 2/23/13, 6:55 am

A few weeks back, the state legislature heard some testimony regarding the new DUI provisions enacted into law with the passage of I-502. These provisions were the most controversial aspect of the initiative among traditional drug law reformers, but throughout the entire campaign, there were very few actual numbers around to convey what the actual risk was.

For instance, how easy is it to be at the 5ng/ml limit? How long do people usually stay there? Is it an accurate measure of impairment? There have been a few studies on this, but far from any kind of consensus.

Also, how many people get marijuana DUI’s already? How many more are likely to get them now that prosecutions could be easier to obtain under I-502?

From the Seattle Times, here was what we learned about the latter set of questions from the testimony:

There has been no jump in “green DUIs,” said the Washington State Patrol’s toxicologist, Dr. Fiona Couper, at the hearing in Olympia Wednesday of the House Public Safety Committee. Seattle DUI attorney Patricia Fulton reported “absolutely no effect” in her defense practice.

This runs contrary to what other DUI attorneys have been saying.

A Seattle attorney whose practice consists solely of medical marijuana cases said more people are coming to him for help fighting charges of driving under the influence of marijuana, even before the new limit took effect.

“I’m seeing one to two a month and have been for a year,” attorney Aaron Pelley said. “Prior to that, I didn’t see really any.”

Pelley believes state patrol officers had been ramping up their enforcement of “green DUIs” in anticipation of the passage of I-502, the law making possession of up to an ounce of marijuana legal. And, now that it’s on the books, he suspects there’s been a “huge spike of number of people being tested.”

What’s the truth here? My guess is that Pelley, who’s been outspoken publicly about the DUI provisions, is generating more business for himself as a result, not that there are more people getting nailed.

So there isn’t much evidence the worst case scenarios are taking root, there’s still a concern with the basic effects of the new law:

Blood testing is not new and not done casually. It’s done at a medical center, and takes money and time. Couper said 1,000 to 1,100 drivers were tested last year statewide, with the median result slightly below 5 nanograms. About one-third also tested positive for alcohol.

If those numbers stay constant in 2013, it would mean that about 500 people tested for marijuana will have a much harder time defending themselves in court against a DUI charge than before I-502 became law. It’s possible that many of these are egregious cases where the DUI is deserved. But it’s also possible that many of them involve innocent medical marijuana patients being harassed. At this point, without more specific numbers, it’s not clear how much of each case we’re dealing with. And assurances from the police that they’ll only go after impaired folks requires a lot of skepticism given the history of DUI enforcement. What’s promising is that this issue has been generating a lot of media attention and that we’ll hopefully be able to highlight any cases where people get trapped in a truly unfair prosecution.

——————————————————

Going back to the first set of questions above, how much is 5ng/ml, and what level of impairment does that really imply? Kiro7 recently aired an investigative report where they took 3 volunteers, had them smoke a popular and potent strain of marijuana, and let them drive around on a closed course. The video is here:

There are a couple of takeaways from this, but the main one is that even at 4, 5, and 7 times the new 5ng/ml legal limit, these volunteers drove fine. This was after consuming .3g. Of course, once they started smoking more than what people normally smoke in a sitting, their abilities tailed off.

Another key point is that even after these volunteers smoked themselves silly on nearly a gram of high quality marijuana and were driving like complete idiots, they all knew full well they were too stoned to drive (even the medical marijuana patient who was a heavy user). This is one of the main differences between alcohol and pot. People who drink too much alcohol become uninhibited along with their impairment, while marijuana users often become timid and cautious (although it was interesting to see that the medical marijuana user was a bit of an exception once they let her get behind the wheel). This is why alcohol-related reckless driving deaths are a frequent occurrence while it’s difficult to find too many instances of them with stoned drivers, even though impairment can occur from the over-consumption of each drug. People who are too stoned to drive often become reluctant to do it, and even if they do, they tend to drive really slow. People who are too drunk to drive often disregard the risks and drive very aggressively.

I’ve written in the past (sadly, the old Reload site is retired) about my own history with marijuana and driving, but didn’t discuss it much during the DUI debates of the I-502 campaign. My main reluctance has always been that it’s a difficult subject that generates mostly gut-level responses that don’t get us anywhere. This exercise provides enough data and visual evidence to at least begin discussing it rationally.

To recap, in my mid-20s for about 2 years, I smoked a small amount of pot at the beginning of nearly every drive I took (except for morning commutes, of course). There were two reasons for this. One, I was doing the hellish 520 commute from Seattle to my job at Microsoft and basically inched home at 2mph every day. And two, I’m a naturally fast driver and I found that pot would make me calmer and more relaxed as I drove. By that point, I’d already gotten somewhere around 7 or 8 speeding tickets in my life and was sick and tired of getting pulled over. Taking a hit off of a one-hitter made it far easier for me to obey the speed limits. In those two years, I was never pulled over for speeding – or for anything else – while stoned.

A one-hitter is a small smoking pipe, often made to look like a cigarette. Compared to what the volunteers in the Kiro7 experiment initially consumed, it probably only held about 1/3 of that, maybe .1g. I’d been wondering if the small amounts I was consuming in those days would even put me over the 5ng/ml limit. Looking at the data shown in the video, it probably was, but maybe not by a lot and probably for not very long.

From a safety standpoint, how safe this was is a matter of perspective and an interesting paradox. I always recognized two drawbacks to this. One, my navigational skills declined somewhat, so in the rare case where I was going somewhere new and was concerned I might get lost, I wouldn’t smoke. Two, my ability to react quickly and intelligently in the face of an emergency was also lessened. Thankfully, this never happened.

But to the outside observer, I was clearly a safer driver when I was stoned. Instead of being the guy weaving through traffic at 80 on I-5, I became the guy driving 55-60 in the right lane listening to some Percy Hill with a big fucking smile on my face. In my normal sober driving mode, I know I can drive safely at those high speeds, but to other drivers, I probably scare the shit out of some of them. And I draw the attention of the police, who like to give me very expensive speeding tickets.

After two years of this, I finally said “fuck it”, sold my car, and started taking public transportation for a little over 7 years. In 2010, after moving out to the suburbs, I once again have a car, but no longer smoke pot, so I have a radar detector in my Prius as I once again weave through rush hour traffic on I-5.

——————————————————

The rationale behind the inclusion of DUI language in I-502 was always clear, even if the result in Colorado showed that it probably wasn’t necessary to win at the ballot box. But the political implications of having drug law reformers concede too much on this point continue to worry me. Other states are considering and even implementing proposals far worse than what we ended up with here. And when there’s an unchallenged notion that stoned driving and drunk driving are the same, it’s difficult to avoid any of these outcomes.

The point of my story wasn’t to argue that stoned driving is good or bad, but to recognize that the issue is a lot more complicated than many people initially assume. From a regulatory standpoint, doing things that have worked or been accepted for drunk driving may not be the correct approach at all for stoned driving.

7 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 2/21

by Carl Ballard — Thursday, 2/21/13, 8:03 am

– I’m a metacommentary aficionado, and this piece on David Brooks is one of the best.

– Seriously, fuck the Yellow Pages.

– Tacoma’s libraries are now lending a hand to help the food banks get back on solid ground. Librarians wanted to hold a food drive, but figured they would get more goods by forgiving overdue fines in exchange for food donations.

– Seattle is going to start taking Chicago’s bikers and the jobs that come with them.

– It’s somehow comforting to know that Washington isn’t the only state with Godawful legislators.

– Taking lefty radio off the air in Seattle and replacing it with sports talk in an already saturated sports talk market isn’t working. Switch back to lefty talk. Although this time, maybe get some local people.

– Good to know the GOP are opposed to authoritarianism.

– I enjoy biking in the snow, but I’m glad we didn’t get a chance to West of the Cascades.

65 Stoopid Comments

Pips in Their Rows

by Lee — Thursday, 2/7/13, 7:30 am

Due to my shameful 2-11 record in fantasy football this season, I welcomed the league to my house on Sunday for the game (it’s been a tradition for the last place finisher to host the Super Bowl every year). Our league started 15 years ago with a bunch of recently-transplanted Boeing engineers straight out of college. Most of us have left the company or been laid off, but a few of the original crew are still at the company. In talking to one of them this weekend, it’s clear that the battery problems with the 787 are a serious headache for Boeing, but many of the problems with the 787 were things that a lot of folks (even going back to when I was there and it was still the 7E7) were fully anticipating. And it sounds like some are starting to voice that a little more.

I left the company in 2000, but even prior to that, the vision of a global outsourcing model to build the next big Boeing plane had already been articulated. Some of the older folks in my group (I was a flight control test engineer) were nervous. Others were beyond nervous and predicting doom. One of them fired off a long, angry email to the all-company email list. He was reprimanded, but not fired. I’d love to read that email today, as I’d expect it would be like reading the scrolls of Nostradamus.

Outsourcing has occurred in a lot of different work environments. And in some of them, it’s arguably achieved its objectives – lower production costs with equal or near-equal production. But within the tech world, nearly all the attempts at outsourcing I’ve seen have been disasters. I’m not talking about just tech support or research or some specialized one-off skill, I’m talking about efforts to design, build, and test a large-scale development project with different project groups located around the globe. The logistical difficulties and communication issues involved quickly overwhelm your ability to move at the pace you need to move at.

Let me give a simple example more related to the world I currently inhabit, the world of software services and big data. This’ll be familiar to more people than the innards of a jumbo jet, but I promise I’ll get back to Boeing afterwards.

[Read more…]

14 Stoopid Comments

Inauguration Day review: the real Election Day

by N in Seattle — Sunday, 1/20/13, 6:43 pm

As we look forward to Barack Obama’s second inauguration (and fourth Oath of Office*), let us hearken back to the day he was re-elected. I refer, of course, to the Monday following the second Wednesday in December (in 2012, that was December 17). That’s when all 538 Presidential and 538 Vice Presidential votes were cast. That’s when 332 of those Electors — a clear, solid majority of the electorate — voted for the winning ticket, Obama and Biden. You may think you were voting for Obama/Biden or Romney/Ryan (or even for one of the other pairs on the ballot) on November 6, but you weren’t. In truth, you were voting for slates of Electors, who are the only Americans who actually cast Presidential and Vice Presidential ballots.

*

  1. botched by the Chief Justice in 2009
  2. re-administered in 2009
  3. privately, today
  4. tomorrow at noon

You weren’t an Elector, nor was I. However, I was a whole lot closer to matriculating at the Electoral College than any of our readers — had Maria Ehsan, the Elector chosen at the 7th Congressional District’s Democratic caucus back in May, been unable to attend the Electoral College meeting in Olympia, yours truly (the Alternate Elector from WA-07) would have taken her place as one of Washington’s 12 Electors.

So I was right there in the State Reception Room in Olympia’s Legislative Building at noon on December 17, peering over the shoulders of the Electors as they cast their votes. I can affirm that we had no faithless Electors in the state of Washington in 2012, despite the ridiculous efforts of teahadists to get them to change their minds. Even I, as a mere Alternate, received a letter from one of them; if you’re interested, you can read a DailyKos diary I wrote about it, as well as the letter itself (page 1, page 2). The Electors — and, I presume, Democratic Electors in all of the blue states — were hit with both snail-mail and email.

Electors at work

Parenthetically, in its Presidential election history since 1892, Washington has seen one faithless Elector. In 1976, when Washington backed Jerry Ford over Jimmy Carter (who, of course, won nationally), Republican Elector Mike Padden wrote Ronald Reagan on his ballot. Reagan had narrowly lost to the incumbent President in the GOP primaries and convention, and apparently Padden was still upset about it.

And where is this renegade, this apostate, now? Why, he was just re-elected to the State Senate from the 4th LD near Spokane; this lawbreaker (RCW 29A.56.340 cites a $1000 fine for faithless Electors) currently chairs the Senate Law and Justice Committee. Then again, Republicans probably think he was a savant for tossing aside Ford to choose St. Ronnie four years early.

So what was it like to participate in this Constitutionally-mandated ceremony, this unique exercise of the American system of governance? To be honest, it was a rather dull event, carefully stage-managed by Sam Reed and his staff. They had a very strict protocol to follow, directed by the National Archives. Except for a couple of verbal slips — Sam Reed: “the United Nations, uh, I mean States”, presiding Elector Heather Fralick: “12 votes for Joe Biden as President of the United States” — the really interesting stuff came before the Electoral College was convened and right at the very end of the event.

Before going into that, though, here’s proof that Washington’s Electors voted as their fellow voters asked them to:

Barack on POTUS ballotJoe on VP ballot
[Read more…]

39 Stoopid Comments

New Beginnings

by Lee — Sunday, 1/20/13, 8:28 am

This Tuesday, Governor Inslee and Attorney General Ferguson will meet with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to discuss the implementation of the state’s new marijuana regulations. According to Inslee’s communications director, David Postman, Inslee requested the meeting.

A good part of this news I’m enthusiastic about. Despite not being a supporter of I-502 during the campaign, Inslee appears to be keeping his word about supporting its implementation, part of which could involve some butting of heads with the Obama Administration. Inslee has a certain amount of leverage right now to get things started. He’s a Democratic governor in a state that just overwhelmingly voted to bring about this change.

Also, with Eric Holder staying on the job in Obama’s second term, it’ll be easier for Inslee to come to an understanding that won’t be swept under the rug by someone else coming in. Maybe I’m being too optimistic about that considering what happened with Obama’s promises regarding medical marijuana in his first term, but it’s worth noting that states that had more thorough statewide medical marijuana regulations (like Colorado, New Mexico, and New Jersey) didn’t have as much interference as states that didn’t (like California and Montana).

Regulated marijuana sales to all adults are certainly another level of defiance against federal prohibition, and the Obama Administration has yet to make any kind of statement about respecting statewide laws like I-502 that they previously did with medical marijuana laws (and then didn’t quite keep). But the country has transformed quite a bit since medical marijuana laws started becoming a reality in the 90s. When even the Drug Czar is forced to acknowledge the changed landscape, we’re in uncharted territory.

If Inslee and Ferguson can get a promise (even if it’s a private one) from Holder that they’ll respect the implementation of I-502, that’ll be an even more significant sign of how much things have changed. I-502 was set up with this in mind, including a number of provisions meant to placate the fears of feds (requiring facilities to be 1000 ft from schools and parks, FBI background checks for licensees, per se DUI language). That may be enough for the Administration to take that next leap.

But it may not. It’s also possible that Holder will dig in his heels for the drug war establishment and tell Inslee to put the brakes on I-502’s implementation or to expect enforcement actions or a lawsuit. I’d hope that Inslee would be able to explain how politically unwise this is, but it’s not clear where his thinking (or the Administration’s) is on all this. All of this is now happening in the shadow of the larger battle over gun control, and the optics of overriding a law like I-502 in the midst of that could make for some unusual alliances.

We’ll find out something on Tuesday, even if it’s just that the Administration is still not ready to commit to anything. As I’ve mentioned before, this may be the worst outcome, as it casts doubt over the ability of the WSLCB to start regulating this market without the participants later becoming criminals.

2 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 11/30

by Carl Ballard — Friday, 11/30/12, 7:57 am

– 6,000 speeders can’t be wrong.

– Your birthright is being one person ahead in this line.

– I wouldn’t have guessed the West Seattle Tool Library would be a hit, but clearly it’s doing something right.

– The Onion has the best explanation of our anti-tax moment yet.

– Glenn Beck does something ridiculous; day follows night.

– I’ve linked to the Seattle City Hall weddings for gay couples on the first day it’s available. but here’s some more information.

– It’s better not seeing what’s coming.

– Clearly the Tacoma Druggists is the greatest name for a baseball team ever.

71 Stoopid Comments

The Myth of “Relinquishing the Market”

by Lee — Wednesday, 11/28/12, 9:57 pm

In the Huffington Post, Lucia Graves repeats one of the biggest myths of the entire I-502 campaign:

As voters in Washington state this month legalized marijuana for recreational use, they overrode the concerted lobbying of a conspicuous interest group: The dispensaries that already had the right to sell marijuana for medical use, and who now risk relinquishing that lucrative marketplace to new competitors.

Though one might assume that legalization would be opposed primarily by law enforcement and social conservatives, nearly all of the money donated to fight the ballot measure in Washington came not from such groups but rather from the existing medical marijuana industry, according to state campaign contribution filings.

All things told, the anti-502 forces dabbled in far more fantasy and myth-making than those who supported the initiative. But the idea that the anti-502 crowd was simply a bunch of greedy dispensary owners trying to protect their turf was also a fantasy. As a supporter of the initiative, I mostly bit my tongue throughout the campaign over this point, but now that the vote passed, I feel compelled to kill off this myth once and for all.

The opposition to I-502 from the activist and medical marijuana community had two primary reasons. First, it was a result of various aspects of the bill. The per se DUI provisions were a very big part of that, but so was the lack of home growing and the 1 ounce possession limit. What New Approach Washington (the group behind I-502) saw as necessary regulations to appeal to undecided voters, many activists and medical marijuana patients saw as new open doors for the police to go after medical marijuana patients and even regular users.

The second reason was due to longtime internal divisions in the state’s activist community. When Sensible Washington was trying to get a legalization initiative on the ballot in 2010, an expected source of funding mysteriously dried up at the last minute. At the time, I tried to investigate (this was long before I had any affiliation with the group), but couldn’t get anyone to divulge what happened. The leaders of Sensible Washington blamed Alison Holcomb (who eventually founded New Approach Washington), and since then, there’s been a serious rift in the community between the two groups. If you look at the folks who were most outspoken in opposition to I-502 this year, almost all of them had some affiliation with Sensible Washington. In fact, they even wrote the No on I-502 argument for the voter’s guide.

In her post, Graves writes about how the funding for the opposition came primarily from the medical marijuana community, but that’s only because the opposition received almost no funding at all. The I-502 campaign raised $5.6 million, compared to the opposition’s $16,000. If the medical marijuana dispensaries were in such a lucrative marketplace and needed to guard their turf, they could’ve scared up far more than $16,000.

Beyond that, Graves is simply incorrect when she talks about “dispensaries that already had the right to sell marijuana for medical use”. Dispensaries in Washington state are still technically illegal (thanks to Governor Gregoire’s veto in 2011). It’s only in Seattle and a limited few other places where the authorities have generally looked the other way. In that environment, it’s possible that some folks were making good money, but just about any of those people would stand to benefit far more by becoming a totally above-board dispensary that sold to everyone. If anyone was opposing I-502 because they wanted to keep a system where they were quasi-legal and could only sell to a smaller segment of the population, they’re likely too dumb to stay in business for that long anyway.

Sadly, one of the biggest purveyors of this myth was our friend Dominic Holden from The Stranger. Back in April, he wrote this in the New York Times:

In late February, Dr. Gil Mobley, a physician with a local clinic providing medical-marijuana authorizations, began a campaign called No on I-502, a new name for a group that, before, called itself Patients Against I-502. It anticipates donations from lawyers and doctors, said its treasurer, Anthony Martinelli, and pot dispensaries may also finance a fall volley of television commercials.

Needless to say, the pot dispensaries never did that. There wasn’t a single anti-502 television ad made. And Holden never explained what basis he had for saying that. He never quoted any dispensary operators who opposed it. Nor did he explain what Mobley’s financial motive was. In fact, because I-502 bans home grows for non-patients, Mobley’s clinic will likely see increased profits from folks who still want a doctor to authorize their green thumb to cure whatever ails them. And at no point this year did anyone manage to explain how it made financial sense for the state’s few dispensary operators to oppose I-502.

At the end of Graves’ article, she quotes several dispensary operators who opposed the measure, and they all repeated what has long been known:

Trek Hollnagel, a spokesman for the Conscious Care Cooperative in Northern Seattle, also dismissed the notion that his dispensary fought the measure out of self-interest, saying that while the law does take away some patient “rights” — he again cited the provision on driving — he added it’s a victory to a certain extent, because there will be some form of arrest protection for everybody.

“I would say it’s kind of a mixed emotion,” Hollnagel said.

Hollnagel continued that the new law might be good for business, because it would make patients feel more comfortable about seeking help.

“In my professional opinion I think this will be beneficial for the cannabis industry as far as the dispensaries and all aspects of business go,” he said.

A lot of people don’t want to believe this for one reason or another, but it was the truth. Dispensary operators were somewhat caught between a rock and a hard place. They had customers who vehemently opposed the measure (and who on Facebook tried to identify dispensaries who didn’t oppose it and organize boycotts), but also knew that I-502 would have some pretty serious benefits as well. In the end, most dared not offend their customers. And now that I-502 has passed, a lot of them could potentially make a lot more money in a fully regulated system.

14 Stoopid Comments

Open Thread 11/19

by Carl Ballard — Monday, 11/19/12, 8:05 am

– Political talk radio is a tough business model, but the loss of it in Seattle is tough. Maybe whoever tries to take up the mantle next can air some local content.

– Who would have predicted that Rupert Murdoch tweet horrible things?

– I wish I thought that using this technology to take down a mythic military icon and CIA chief would be startling enough to engender a reevaluation but I don’t.

– This crisis could use more butterscotch pudding.

– Who could have predicted that one of the nastier impeachment managers (and that’s saying something) would be horrible the next time a Democrat was in the White House?

– Unlike Leschi, Quiemuth was never tried or even officially charged with a capital offense, yet he was the first to die for his alleged crimes. After his murder, Quiemuth’s body was buried near Fort Nisqually, but in July 1895, together with Leschi, he was re-interred near the mouth of Muck Creek in a grove of prairie oak.

129 Stoopid Comments

Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza!

by Darryl — Friday, 11/16/12, 11:37 pm

SlateTV: The GOP’s mad rush to immigration reform.

Ed: Republicans try to reinvent themselves with minority voters.

The Losers Weepers:

  • Maddow: Republicans begin their purge.
  • Jonathan Mann: Karl Rove goes nuts.
  • Ann Telnaes: Mitt blames gifts.
  • Sam Seder: Mitt Romney blames loss on Obama’s “gifts.”
  • Jon on Bill-O the Clown and the end of Traditional America.
  • Thom: The Ryan excuse.
  • Maddow: Leaderless…some Republicans learning 2012 lessons better than others
  • SlateTV: Romney’s bitter excuses.
  • Young Turks: Romney’s postmortem ‘gifts’ excuse.
  • Republicans need to stop being the stupid party.
  • The boy who couldn’t handle it.
  • SlateTV: Secession Petitions of the disgruntled.
  • Young Turks: ME GOP Chair, “Hundreds of Black people committed Voter Fraud!!!
  • Letterman: Top ten Romney Scapegoats (via Crooks and Liars).
  • Sam Seder: Maine G.O.P. chair on “dozens of Blacks” seen voting.
  • Lawrence O’Donnell: What the G.O.P. needs from Romney.
  • Thom: Mitt Romney couldn’t be Santa
  • Buzz60: three signs Republicans haven’t learned from their losses….
  • Maddow: Romney’s final insult to the American public.
  • Jon: Look who’s still talking!
  • Young Turks: the Obama ‘mind control’ conspiracy
  • Liberal Viewer: Right wing crazies lost Romney the election.:
  • Jon and Kristen Schaal married and single women voting their viginas
  • Mitt Romney “explains” his loss (via Slog).

Kimmel: This week in unnecessary censorship.

Sam Seder: So long, Twinkies.

The five funniest campaign videos of 2012.

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

Mark Fiore: Newly frugal guy!

Young Turks: Rep. Allen West loses election & his grip with reality.

The Petraeus Surge:

  • Jon: Never saw it coming
  • SlateTV: Wikipedia entry mentions Broadwell-Petraeus affair in January
  • Young Turks: Pat Robertson excuses the General.
  • ONN: Petraeus is just a start.
  • TV fail: All (up) In(my snatch)?!?
  • Ann Telnaes: Your privacy.

Monika Eckhart goes to Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers’ Office.

Rush Limbaugh goes all apoplectic over a Twinkie joke petition!

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

Pap and Katrina Vanden Heuvel: Obama should get tough against GOP obstruction.

Super-duper-scandal of All Time:

  • SlateTV: McCain snaps at reporter.
  • Lawrence O’Donnell: tears into Graham and McCain for hypocrisy on Rice appointment:
  • Anderson Cooper whumps Rep. Rohrabacher on Benghazi, “What you’re saying is factually not correct”
  • Al Sharpton: What the hell is going on with John McCain??
  • Ed: Bitter, hypocrite John McCain wants details, yet skips Benghazi briefing.

White House: West Wing Week.

Lawrence O’Donnell: Rewriting a blatant, malicious FAUX News conspiracy theory

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

113 Stoopid Comments

Drinking Liberally — Seattle

by Darryl — Tuesday, 11/13/12, 3:48 pm

DLBottlePlease join us tonight for a pint and a post-election gloating and celebration 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, For Thursday, the Spokane chapter and Drinking Liberally Tacoma meet. And next 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.

21 Stoopid Comments

Weekend Roundup

by Lee — Saturday, 11/10/12, 8:53 pm

With the passage of I-502, I’m hoping to get back into some more regular blogging here. I’ve waited a long time for this day, and now that it’s here, I want to closely follow how this all plays out. Here are some of the early developments in this new era:

– You’ve probably already seen the news that King and Pierce Counties have dismissed 220 marijuana possession cases. But at the end of that post from Jonathan Martin was another interesting nugget:

Earlier this week, the chief criminal deputy prosecutor in Spokane County, Jack Driscoll, appeared to take a more conservative position. He told the Spokesman-Review that, even after Dec. 6, the only marijuana which was legal to possess was pot sold in the state-licensed stores called for in I-502. Those stores won’t be created for at least a year.

“The only thing that is legal is selling marijuana through those stores,” Driscoll said. “That will be regulated by the state. You can’t under this initiative have an ounce of marijuana that doesn’t come from a state-issued provider. You still can’t have black-market marijuana.”

Looking forward to the first judge who gets to laugh out loud at that argument.

– One of the most interesting things to watch now is the international reaction to what Colorado and Washington voters have done. Especially in Mexico, where over $1,000,000,000/year pours into the pockets of drug gangs from the illegal marijuana trade.

– NCAA student-athletes in both Washington and Colorado still won’t be able to use marijuana, even if they’re over 21. Last year, Pullman police arrested several Washington State basketball players for pot possession. Considering that underage use is still illegal, that’s likely to keep happening.

– Of course, even with the passage of marijuana legalization, reefer madness isn’t going to just disappear. This gem – from the New York Daily News, but featuring a “chemical dependency professional” at Argosy University in Seattle – is about how this initiative will somehow cause Boeing and Microsoft to suck at building planes and software unless the feds intervene. As someone who worked at both companies in my 20s (quite successfully) while also being a regular marijuana consumer, I’m not sure I even know how to start making fun of that. It’s a good reminder that even though initiatives can fix a broken policy, they can’t fix stupid.

7 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Final Predictions

by Darryl — Tuesday, 11/6/12, 2:28 pm


Obama Romney
98.9% probability of winning 1.1% probability of winning
Mean of 311 electoral votes Mean of 227 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Huh. Four years ago at this time, I was frantically entering the eleven new polls that had come out on election day. Today…not so much. We get only one rather inconsequential poll, although because it is Maine, and the Congressional districts are reported, we get three new polls for the price of one.

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
ME Maine PRC 01-Nov 03-Nov 905 3.3 53.3 42.2 O+11.1
ME1 Maine PRC 01-Nov 03-Nov 469 — 56.7 39.0 O+17.7
ME2 Maine PRC 01-Nov 03-Nov 436 — 49.7 45.7 O+4.0

As a consequence, this analysis differs little from yesterday’s analysis.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 98,946 times and Romney wins 1,054 times (including the 180 ties). Obama received (on average) 311 (+2) to Romney’s 227 (-2) electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 98.9% (+0.1%) probability of winning and Romney would have a 1.1% (-0.1%) probability of winning.

My prediction: Obama wins. It’s almost certain.

Here’s our look back over the race from a series of elections simulated every seven days using polls from 06 Nov 2011 to 06 Nov 2012, and including polls from the preceding seven days (FAQ).

The interesting thing is the very ragged, multimodal distribution of electoral votes seen in the graph below. The single most likely outcome in this race is an Obama victory with 303 electoral votes. There is a 9.2% probability of that happening.

Then it jumps to 332 electoral votes, with a 6% probability. And then to 318 electoral votes with a 3.8% probability. And so on.

The raggedness of the electoral votes distribution reflects that there are a non-trivial number of important states with large uncertainty. Florida is Romney’s but with only a 63% probability. Iowa is Obama’s but with only an 84% probability. North Carolina is in Romney’s column, but with a 74% probability, and Virginia goes to Obama, but with a 78% probability.

Ten most probable electoral vote outcomes for Obama (full distribution here):

  • 303 electoral votes with a 9.19% probability
  • 332 electoral votes with a 5.94% probability
  • 318 electoral votes with a 3.80% probability
  • 304 electoral votes with a 3.78% probability
  • 290 electoral votes with a 3.49% probability
  • 319 electoral votes with a 3.30% probability
  • 297 electoral votes with a 2.97% probability
  • 314 electoral votes with a 2.30% probability
  • 312 electoral votes with a 2.23% probability
  • 333 electoral votes with a 2.11% probability

[Read more…]

8 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Penultimate stability

by Darryl — Monday, 11/5/12, 10:37 pm


Obama Romney
98.8% probability of winning 1.2% probability of winning
Mean of 309 electoral votes Mean of 229 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Another day, 26 new polls, and we are still at the same place. President Barack Obama is still leading Governor Mitt Romney by 309 to 229 electoral votes (on average).

I’ll have one more update tomorrow, early afternoon—before any election polls close. Here is today’s batch:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CO PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 1096 3.0 52 46 O+6
CO Keating 02-Nov 04-Nov 603 4.0 50 46 O+4
CO Lake 31-Oct 04-Nov 400 5.0 45 44 O+1
FL Gravis 04-Nov 05-Nov 1060 3.1 49 49 tie
FL Insider Advantage 04-Nov 04-Nov 437 4.6 47 52 R+5
FL PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 955 3.2 50 49 O+1
FL Mellman 30-Oct 02-Nov 800 3.4 47 45 O+2
IA ARG 02-Nov 04-Nov 600 4.0 48 49 R+1
MI Mitchell 04-Nov 04-Nov 1305 2.7 51 46 O+5
MO SurveyUSA 28-Oct 03-Nov 589 4.1 43.1 49.9 R+6.8
NV PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 750 3.6 51 47 O+4
NH Rasmussen 04-Nov 04-Nov 750 4.0 50 48 O+2
NH New England Collage 03-Nov 04-Nov 687 3.7 50 46 O+4
NH ARG 02-Nov 04-Nov 600 4.0 49 49 tie
NH U NH 01-Nov 04-Nov 789 3.5 51 48 O+3
NC Gravis 04-Nov 04-Nov 1130 2.9 46 50 R+4
NC PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 926 3.2 49 49 tie
OH Gravis Marketing 04-Nov 05-Nov 1316 2.7 49 48 O+1
OH Rasmussen 04-Nov 04-Nov 750 4.0 49 49 tie
OH SurveyUSA 01-Nov 04-Nov 803 3.5 48.8 44.3 O+4.5
OH Ohio Poll 31-Oct 04-Nov 889 3.3 50.0 48.5 O+1.5
PA Gravis Marketing 04-Nov 04-Nov 1060 3.0 49 46 O+3
SD Neilson Brothers 31-Oct 04-Nov 633 4.0 41 53 R+12
VA Rasmussen 04-Nov 04-Nov 750 4.0 48 50 R+2
VA Marist 01-Nov 02-Nov 1165 2.9 48 47 O+1
VA Mellman 30-Oct 02-Nov 800 3.4 48 45 O+3

Colorado gives three new poll leads to Obama. Obama takes 6 of 7 current polls and has a probability of winning the state of 94%.

We get four new Florida polls. One goes to Romney, two to Obama and the last is a tie. Romney has the edge among the 9 current polls, as he is up +0.8%. That translates into a 69% probability of Romney winning the state. Here is the past couple of months of polling:

ObamaRomney05Oct12-05Nov12Florida

Another Iowa puts Romney over Obama, by a slim +1%. Even so, Obama takes six of the eight polls collected over the past week, and it earns him a 90% probability of winning the state now.

In Michigan, Obama polls at +5%. The verdict of the 5 current polls is that Obama will take the state with a 95% probability.

Nevada gives Obama a +4% poll. Combined with the other current poll Obama takes the state 90% of the simulated elections.

A flurry of four New Hampshire polls today mostly gives Obama small leads. There is one tie, however. This brings us to 8 polls taken in the past week for the granite state. Two of them are ties, but Obama leads in the rest by small margins. The analysis gives Obama a 91% probability of winning the state.

Two North Carolina polls go +4% Romney and tie. The third current poll is also a tie. Together Romney has a narrow advantage, and a 72% chance of winning the state.

Four new Ohio polls today. One is a tie, and three give Obama tiny leads. But we now have 12 (count em!) polls collected in the past week. Two are ties, but Obama leads in the remaining 10. The provide evidence that Obama will take the state with a 98% probability.

The only Pennsylvania poll supports Obama over Romney by +3%. We only have 5 current polls and, aside from one tie, Obama leads ’em. He gets a 91% probability out of it.

Three new Virginia polls split 2:1 in favor of Obama. Now with six current polls, Obama takes all but one from today. He holds a +1.4% edge and seems to have a 78% chance of taking the state. This is worth a picture:

ObamaRomney05Oct12-05Nov12Virginia

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 98,814 times and Romney wins 1,186 times (including the 152 ties). Obama received (on average) 309 to Romney’s 229 electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 98.8% (+0.5%) probability of winning and Romney would have a 1.2% (+0.5%) 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 05 Nov 2011 to 05 Nov 2012, and including polls from the preceding seven days (FAQ).

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

44 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Interesting polls, no movement

by Darryl — Sunday, 11/4/12, 11:15 pm


Obama Romney
98.3% probability of winning 1.7% probability of winning
Mean of 309 electoral votes Mean of 229 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

My analysis yesterday showed President Barack Obama leading Governor Mitt Romney by a mean of 309 to 229 electoral votes. Obama would be expected to win an election now with an 98.9% probability and Romney, 1.1%.

Today I found a pack of 29 polls that cover 17 states. The polls have something to celebrate for the Romney camp—ties in a New Hampshire and a Pennsylvania poll, a small lead in a Michigan poll, and a lead in the only Florida poll. But the Obama camp has some celebrating of their own, including leads in three Ohio polls, leads in three of four Pennsylvania polls and, perhaps most importantly, solidifying his formerly tenuous lead in Virginia with two more leads in VA polls.

Altogether…it’s a wash. The expected electoral votes are split identically. Romney’s probability of winning an election goes up ever so slightly, however.

Here are the polls:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
AZ PPP 02-Nov 03-Nov 1080 3.0 46 53 R+7
FL Pulse 29-Oct 29-Oct 1000 3.0 48 50 R+2
IN Rasmussen 01-Nov 01-Nov 600 4.0 43 52 R+9
IA PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 1122 2.9 50 48 O+2
ME Critical Insights 30-Oct 31-Oct 613 4.0 49 42 O+7
MA UMass 31-Oct 03-Nov 800 4.1 57 37 O+20
MA WNEU 26-Oct 01-Nov 525 4.2 58 38 O+20
MI PPP 01-Nov 03-Nov 700 3.7 52 46 O+6
MI Baydoun 02-Nov 02-Nov 1913 2.2 46.2 46.9 R+0.7
MN SurveyUSA 01-Nov 03-Nov 556 4.2 52 41 O+11
MO PPP 02-Nov 03-Nov 835 3.4 45 53 R+8
MT PPP 02-Nov 03-Nov 836 3.4 45 52 R+7
MT Mason-Dixon 29-Oct 31-Oct 625 4.0 43 53 R+10
MT Rasmussen 29-Oct 29-Oct 500 4.5 43 53 R+10
NH PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 1550 2.5 50 48 O+2
NH U NH 31-Oct 02-Nov 502 4.4 48 48 tie
OH Ohio Poll 25-Oct 30-Oct 1182 2.9 48 46 O+2
OH Pulse 29-Oct 29-Oct 1000 3.0 48 46 O+2
OH PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 1000 3.1 52 47 O+5
PA PPP 02-Nov 03-Nov 790 3.5 52 46 O+6
PA Muhlenberg 01-Nov 03-Nov 430 5.0 49 46 O+3
PA Susquehanna 29-Oct 31-Oct 800 3.5 47 47 tie
PA Pulse 30-Oct 30-Oct 1000 3.0 49 46 O+3
UT Mason-Dixon 29-Oct 31-Oct 625 4.0 25 70 R+45
VA Pulse 30-Oct 30-Oct 1000 3.0 49 48 O+1
VA PPP 03-Nov 04-Nov 975 3.1 51 47 O+4
WA PPP 01-Nov 03-Nov 932 3.2 53 46 O+7
WI PPP 02-Nov 03-Nov 1256 2.8 51 48 O+3
WI Pulse 29-Oct 29-Oct 1000 3.0 49 48 O+1

The only Florida poll puts Romney over Obama by +2%. Romney now has four of the five current polls, and an estimated 74% probability of taking the state in an election held tonight.

Iowa has Obama up by +2% in a new poll. This state is looking like a lock for Obama. He has led in seven of the eight current polls. Even if the margins are small, the simulation gives Obama a 97% probability that his overall +3% lead is real.

In Michigan, Obama leads Romney by +6% in one new poll, and Romney leads Obama by +0.7% in the other. And that second poll is a monster, with over 1,900 respondents. Putting the five current polls together, Obama is down to a +2.8% lead and a 90% probability of taking the state now.

A new Minnesota poll has Obama leading by a comfortable +11%, a margin that when combined with two more modest margins in the current polls suggests an almost certain win. I might not have even mentioned this poll, except that, in the previous presidential poll analysis thread, Serial Conservative pointed out a Minnesota poll that had Romney up by +1% in the state! He did add the point: “Not sure whether this meets the qualifications for inclusion in Darryl’s analyses.”

So, I dutifully investigated (were it a weekday, I would have called the pollster). This poll was done for American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) organization that has a long track record of producing and airing factually challenged anti-Obama ads. That isn’t a good start. But what I found is a record of candidate polls being released. That makes it pretty certain that the MN poll was released selectively.

Why does it matter? Consider this. Suppose some 501(c)(4) hit machine hires Mr. P to do 20 polls over several months in a race between Ms. D and Mr. R. And Mr. P is a scrupulous pollster. As it happens, the first 19 polls showed Ms. D leading by margins of +6 to +11. But, just because of the sampling variability in polling that 20th poll comes in with Ms. D up by only +1%. Mr. P’s client releases the poll to show how competitive the race is—good strategy, bad statistics. Of course, the race isn’t close. The client got one of those one-in-twenty results for a race that is really about Ms. D+8%. Mr. P hasn’t done anything wrong. But the released poll suffers from selectivity bias because the other 19 polls were not also released. Releasing only the Ms. D+1% poll is completely misleading as to the actual state of the race.

So…where were we?

Oh…yes, New Hampshire gives us two new polls. One has Obama up by +2% and the other is a tie. Obama takes the other three current polls by mostly narrow margins. Obama would win the state with an 88% probability in a race this evening.

Another day, another sprinkling of Ohio polls. All three go to Obama by smallish margins. Obama leads in seven of nine current polls, and there is one tie. The evidence is overwhelming, suggesting Obama would win an election now by a 98% probability.

Suddenly there is interest in Pennsylvania! Of the four new polls, Obama leads in three, and one is a tie. The four current polls (all added today) combine to give Obama an 89% probability of winning the election now.

The big surprise is the new set of polls from Virginia. One gives Obama a +1% lead, and the other a +4% edge. This solidifies the slight lead in the state that Obama took yesterday. The three current polls now have Obama’s chances at a 77% probability of taking the state.

Obama just squeaks by in two new Wisconsin polls (+1% and +3%). The collection of six current polls (one tie and five Obama leads) have Obama with a 97% probability of winning the state now.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 98,318 times and Romney wins 1,682 times (including the 144 ties). Obama received (on average) 309 to Romney’s 229 electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 98.3% (-0.6%) probability of winning and Romney would have a 1.7% (+0.6%) 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 04 Nov 2011 to 04 Nov 2012, and including polls from the preceding seven days (FAQ).

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

46 Stoopid Comments

Poll Analysis: Two days of good polls for Obama

by Darryl — Saturday, 11/3/12, 8:35 pm


Obama Romney
98.9% probability of winning 1.1% probability of winning
Mean of 309 electoral votes Mean of 229 electoral votes

Electoral College Map

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Lousiana Maine Maryland Massachusettes Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Electoral College Map

Georgia Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Delaware Connecticut Florida Mississippi Alabama Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia D.C. Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

My previous analysis was completed early Friday morning, before most polls were released. The analysis showed President Barack Obama leading Governor Mitt Romney by 302 to 236 electoral votes (on average). In an election held yesterday, Obama would be expected to win with a 94.4% probability, and Romney with a 5.6% probability.

There have been 35 new polls released since then that cover 23 “states”. I put states in quotes, because we get polls for ME-1 and ME-2 this batch. Lots of swing states are included in this batch, and they largely come down on the side of Obama:

start end sample % % %
st poll date date size MOE O R diff
CA Field Poll 25-Oct 30-Oct 751 3.6 54 39 O+15
CO PPP 31-Oct 01-Nov 825 — 50 46 O+4
CO SurveyUSA 28-Oct 31-Oct 695 3.8 47 45 O+2
CT PPP 01-Nov 02-Nov 1220 2.8 55 42 O+13
FL Mason-Dixon 30-Oct 01-Nov 800 3.5 45 51 R+6
FL Marist 30-Oct 01-Nov 1545 2.5 49 47 O+2
GA 20/20 Insight 29-Oct 31-Oct 1316 2.7 45 52 R+7
HI Civil Beat 24-Oct 26-Oct 1218 2.8 61 34 O+27
IN Howey DePauw 28-Oct 30-Oct 800 3.5 41 51 R+10
IA Gravis Marketing 01-Nov 01-Nov 594 4.0 49 45 O+4
IA Selzer 30-Oct 02-Nov 800 3.5 47 42 O+5
IA Mellman Group 30-Oct 01-Nov 600 4.0 46 44 O+2
ME PPP 01-Nov 02-Nov 1633 2.4 55 42 O+13
ME1 PPP 01-Nov 02-Nov 817 — 59 39 O+20
ME2 Gravis 01-Nov 02-Nov 509 4.3 50 47 O+3
ME2 PPP 01-Nov 02-Nov 816 — 51 46 O+5
MA PPP 01-Nov 02-Nov 1089 3.0 57 42 O+15
MA Kimball 31-Oct 01-Nov 761 3.5 54.0 41.4 O+12.6
MI PPP 01-Nov 03-Nov 700 3.7 52 46 O+6
MI Rasmussen 01-Nov 01-Nov 750 4.0 52 47 O+5
MI Grove Insight 31-Oct 01-Nov 500 4.4 48 41 O+7
MN PPP 31-Oct 01-Nov 772 — 53 44 O+9
NE WeAskAmerica 01-Nov 01-Nov 1178 3.0 41 54 R+13
NV Mellman Group 29-Oct 31-Oct 600 4.0 50 44 O+6
NH Gravis Marketing 01-Nov 01-Nov 497 4.3 50 49 O+1
NH New England Collage 29-Oct 31-Oct 1017 3.7 49.5 44.4 O+5.1
OH Rasmussen 01-Nov 01-Nov 750 4.0 49 49 tie
OH Marist 31-Oct 01-Nov 971 3.1 51 45 O+6
OH CNN/OR 30-Oct 01-Nov 796 3.5 50 47 O+3
OH WeAskAmerica 30-Oct 01-Nov 1649 3.0 50.2 45.8 O+4.4
OR PPP 31-Oct 01-Nov 921 — 52 46 O+6
SD Neilson Brothers 28-Oct 31-Oct 634 3.9 42 50 R+8
UT Dan Jones 26-Oct 01-Nov 870 3.4 26 69 R+43
VA WeAskAmerica 30-Oct 01-Nov 1069 3.0 48.5 47.6 O+0.9
WI WeAskAmerica 30-Oct 01-Nov 1210 3.0 51.5 44.8 O+6.7

Both new Colorado polls offer Obama slim margins over Romney. With five current polls splitting 4 to 1 for Obama, the analysis gives Obama an 81% probability of taking the state.

We get one Florida poll for each candidate, but Romney gets the net benefit. The current polls split 3 to 2 in favor of Romney, giving the G.O.P. nominee about 2/3 probability of taking the state.

All three new Iowa polls go to Obama, who also takes 6 of 7 current polls.

Maine-2 was considered a swing “state”, but both new polls go to Obama. Together the suggest Obama has a 87% chance of taking ME-2’s single electoral vote.

Three new Michigan polls give modest leads to Obama. The President takes all five current polls, suggesting a very high probability of taking the state.

The new Minnesota poll is pretty solid for Obama, who ends up with a high probability of winning the state.

The new Nevada poll puts Obama over Romney by a modest +6%. As it happens, that’s the only poll that falls in the current poll window. It suggests Obama would win the state now with a 86% probability.

Obama leads in two new New Hampshire polls. One gives Obama a slim +1% and the other gives him a +5.1%. All four current polls go to Obama and he looks to have an 88% probability of taking the state now.

Four of five new Ohio polls go to Obama, the fifth is a tie. We now have eleven polls taken in the past week, and Obama leads in nine; Romney leads in one. If the election was held now, Obama would take the state with a 97% probabililty.

In Virginia, Obama squeaks out a +0.9% lead. It is the only current poll, so Obama comes away with a 58% probability of winning, based on this evidence.

Obama gets a modest +6.7% in the new Wisconsin poll. Now he leads in four of five current polls, with the fifth poll being a tie. In the analysis, Obama won just under 100% of the simulated elections.

After 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 98,915 times and Romney wins 1,085 times (including the 66 ties). Obama received (on average) 309 (+7) to Romney’s 229 (-7) electoral votes. In an election held now, Obama would have a 98.9% (+4.5%) probability of winning and Romney would have a 1.1% (-4.5%) 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 03 Nov 2011 to 03 Nov 2012, and including polls from the preceding seven days (FAQ).

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

60 Stoopid Comments

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • …
  • 96
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 10/15/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 10/14/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/13/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/10/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 10/10/25
  • Was This What the Righties Wanted All Along? Thursday, 10/9/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 10/8/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 10/7/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/6/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/3/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky at @goldy.horsesass.org

From the Cesspool…

  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Republicans the Party of Freeing the Slaves on Wednesday Open Thread
  • GrandOldPedophiles on Wednesday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Roger Rabbit on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Spend on the Credit Card GOP on Wednesday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Wednesday Open Thread
  • Elijah Dominic McDotcom on Wednesday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Wednesday Open Thread

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

I no longer use Twitter or Facebook because Nazis. But until BlueSky is bought and enshittified, you can still follow me at @goldy.horsesass.org

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.