Yesterday in the comments someone (can’t find the comment) reminded us of the Princeton Election Consortium blog, which called the 2008 election with better accuracy than Nate Silver. Sam Wang, who runs the blog, doesn’t have a full analysis of the Obama convention bounce, but one of his preliminary findings is that Michelle Obama moved the tracking polls. He also thinks that Romney got a negative convention bounce.
In other polling news, PPP has Obama up by 5 in Ohio, and North Carolina is still basically tied.
PeakVT
The generic Congressional ballot has been tied all year, which is at least better than the trend in 2010.
Linda Featheringill
To continue with the morning crankiness:
PPP found that in Ohio, seniors favored Obama by a couple of points.
All you guys [always male on BJ] who think you can dump on the oldsters because they always vote alike and you can tell what a person thinks by looking at them: Explain that.
Or quit being such ageist jerks.
And get off of my lawn!
[But yes, even I will admit that the over-65 group generally goes about 60% Republican.]
c u n d gulag
It’s fun this morning watching Cup O’ Schmoe’s show.
Schmoe, Halperin, and the Politico crew are practically hysterical.
And of course, Schmoe’s take on this is that Mitt is losing because he’s a “flawed candidate.”
Yes, he is, Schmoe – but he’s YOUR flawed candidate.
He was the best of dwarves that ran.
Schlemizel
It seems from comments over the weekend that the light has dawned on the people inside the Rmoney/rAyn campaign that they are not going to win this thing. Anyone care to speculate on how that changes the way they run?
I think we have seen a huge change already with Willard now suddenly in love with everything Obamacare except the name & the thing that makes it possible. But does that shift help him really? It might buy him a few MOR votes but the wingnuts must be seething this morning.
Does an inevitable Rmoney loss depress the wingnuts and suppress their voting giving us hope for a 3 branch sweep or does it do just the opposite; enrage the wingnuts to redouble their efforts to thwart progress in the country?
the Conster
So the speeches were heard by the nation in full, unedited by the networks, uninterrupted by ads, and no pundits could say anything in advance of the speeches or during the speeches, and this is what happens – people know what they saw and heard and believe their lying eyes instead of what Tom Brokaw said about what they saw and heard. Just goes to show that the media in this country is a threat to democracy.
Valdivia
Raises hand! It was me! :)
Glad to see you linking to him.
jibeaux
Nate Silver calls NC a turnout state — not a lot of persuadable voters, but one where the difference can be made on turnout. Obama doesn’t need NC, but we have got some disastrous state government to forestall so I sure hope we can get the turnout. Plus it would just be awesome. I’m going to try to do what I can.
If we can do this thing, and get some good House and Senate results too, my greatest hope is that this could be remembered as the election that couldn’t be bought. The election that Sheldon Adelson might as well have spent his money on platinum-leaf toilet paper.
Bobby Thomson
@Linda Featheringill: Or that’s further reason to be suspicious about this poll. Always subtract 3 from the PPP spread and the result tends to be accurate. That would mean the lead is only 2.
NonyNony
@Schlemizel:
It’ ain’t over til it’s over, of course. I suspect that Republicans will go for the dirty tricks as hard as possible, crank up the vote suppression in battleground states, and blast the airwaves with unlimited campaign cash while their candidate lies about both his record and his running mate’s record and they count on the press to not bat an eye.
So … I guess that means I don’t think that they’ll change anything. Maybe the character of the lies that they tell, but that would be about it.
Linda Featheringill
I’m actually quite happy to see the Republicans wrestling with the possibility of defeat. I had some worries about Obama’s safety if he actually won reelection but if the RW is struggling with their grief now, perhaps they’ll be able to cope with the election results peacefully.
I don’t think the Republicans are defeated yet but we do seem to be ahead in the race.
What tipped them off that they could lose this thing? The conventions? The polls? What?
Schlemizel
@NonyNony:
Yeah, I think we all expect them to get really ugly but I was more wondering if we could expect to see changes in the tune they sing. Anybody want to speculate on what gopper dreams get tossed overboard in an attempt to lighten the load & where this will help/hurt them?
Butch
Never have quite understood how Silver got his reputation as the statistical nerd god. His writing annoys me.
Schlemizel
@Linda Featheringill:
I’ll be honest and say I thought there was an excellent possibility Obama would not live out his first term. I really thought the response to a black President would be lethal. I worried for his family first but also for our nation.
I’m very glad my worst fears were not realized and I hope thats a good sign for now and for the future.
What tipped them off was that they can count electoral votes. There is not enough wiggle room for them to move enough voters in enough states to win. If they want to go scorched earth I suppose they could try to run up the score in shit holes they will already win in an effort to claim the popular vote & embarrass and further hobble the President. But even that is looking dim from the plls
Schlemizel
@Butch:
He got that rep from being more right more often.
What does his writing style have to do with his statistical skills?
Valdivia
@Linda Featheringill:
I think it is a combination of things. The conventions, the polls, the rising Dem enthusiasm (see the huge crowds Obama has been attracting) and now, finally the money. The Romney people leaked early that they had once again gotten over 100 mil. They were crowing because they were sure the O team would fall short. And Obama now got more than they did. I saw the numbers and apparently while Romney got quite a few small donations, he got most of his money from 6% of his donors. Imagine that.
MattF
Romney is a flawed candidate, deeply flawed, politically incompetent. Just compare him with Obama or either Clinton– not to mention all the other revved-up Dems we saw in Charlotte. The $64 question is how a deeply flawed Republican party ended up with Romney, how it turned out that he was the best they could do.
Valdivia
From someone at Politico via Twitter
.
Ash Can
@Linda Featheringill: I think there’s a big difference between the outlook of the Romney campaign and the GOP leadership and that of the GOP voting base. The GOP leadership may be smart and sensible enough to see the writing on the wall, but that doesn’t mean they’re not going to double down on the batshit for the sole purpose of playing to, and mollifying, their base. You’ve seen the Romneybot trolls here — no amount of evidence is going to convince these people that their guy isn’t going to absolutely stomp the ni-CLANG in November. I for one expect the Romney campaign to set new world records in shit-losing as we get closer to the election, simply because they have nothing left to lose election-wise, and a rather scary base to maintain.
c u n d gulag
@MattF:
The rest of the Republicans didn’t run, for the same reason the stars of the Democratic party didn’t run in 1992 – it’s tough to beat an incumbent President.
Clinton was the only one with the balls to do that aggresively.
No one on the Republicans side, except the assclowns who actually ran, wanted to ruin their chances in 2016 by losing in 2012.
And I find it interesting, that they managed to convince Ryan to join up, in what may end up being a disaster.
Either Ryan feels that he can walk away from this potential train wreck unscathed, or he’s a feckin’ idjit – OR BOTH!
ericblair
@jibeaux:
Mine as well. If the billionaires get the idea that SuperPAC money is just wasted money, that’s what will do in that part of the corrupt system. I’m thinking it is, because it goes to ads and it sure looks like the ad markets are saturated already and people are sick of it. Wouldn’t hurt too if the loose controls make it obvious that the consultants are just pocketing the dough and laughing.
MikeJ
@MattF:
They got Romney because there are still a lot of people in the US who identify as Republicans but aren’t entirely bug fuck crazy. They had every chance in the world to pick Santorum or Herman Cain or Michelle Bachman. Instead they picked the dullest person they could find, and this is the second election in a row where that was the qualification.
If they ever manage to jettison the more blatantly crazy segment of their party, we could be in trouble. Even their sane people are nuts, but a decent politician who could hide the insanity could do a lot of damage.
I’d argue that’s exactly what Bush was. Of course he looks crazy to us now, but a lot of stupid people thought he might mean that compassionate conservatism stuff.
John D
@Butch: Nate is almost unique in that he doesn’t just give his results, he publishes his model and his methodology, so that anybody can A) check his results independently and B) run their own prediction with a different data set. I don’t give a rat’s ass about his writing, I care about his MATH.
GregB
@Butch:
He did predict the 2008 election with near 100% accuracy. He only missed Indiana which President Obama won by 1%.
He also nailed all 35 Senate races.
So, his record and his methods seem sound.
rikyrah
go OHIO GO!!!
rikyrah
@c u n d gulag:
bwa ha ha ha ha ha hah a
Raven
@the Conster: Watching the whole deal now, see why you were jacked.
Schlemizel
@c u n d gulag: Please identify a single “star” that didn’t run this year. Seriously. I can’t think of anyone leading in the GOP that did not run
MikeJ
@c u n d gulag:
I always thought the worst threat was actually somebody like Pawlenty or even Huntsman. Both of them are as nuts as anybody else in the GOP, but they tend to hide it better.
Happily the teabaggers shouted them down. Romney was the only person running as a “not crazy” remaining and he had enough money to last while the party favorites melted down one after the other. Anybody of the not crazy faction that had to raise money to stay in a Republican race can’t get enough oxygen to make it to Iowa.
CarolDuhart2
@c u n d gulag: With Ryan, I would say idjit. There’s a reason why Representatives don’t usually wind up on a national ticket. They know they haven’t the necessary campaign experience. I also suspect that between Romney’s ego and being turned down by better prospects, that’s how he got the nod.
I also think that the Convention convinced a lot of Republicans that Romney is:
Too weak to run his own affairs. The whole Clint Eastwood thing was a lesson in that. Clint was put on at the last minute unvetted and unscripted, pushing out his autobiographical video. For all they knew, Clint could have endorsed Obama on that stage, but the Romney people couldn’t assert themselves to demand Clint read a prewritten script. The whole Ron Paul fiasco with substituted delegates. The speakers who didn’t even endorse Romney except as an afterthought.
No message, endless flip-flops, the fact that Romney and Ryan aren’t even working as a team, Ann Romney’s arrogance that turns off voters.
Also, the states haven’t moved since the Summer.
Eric U.
@Schlemizel: I agree, they are all so delusional that the leading Republicans ran this time. It’s just that they all showed how bad they were and lost to Mitt. There is a real vacuum on the republican side, not saying it’s surprising or anything.
beltane
Did Romeny pull out of NH? I’m in VT and we had been getting bombarded with Romney (and Obama) ads for months. Now the ads have disappeared. A good sign?
jibeaux
Just to think about 2016 for a minute, I think Marco Rubio caught a lot of people’s attention this year, but I dunno. One, he’s a full-on teabagger and the appeal of that is shrinking. I’m not sure being Cuban really adds much value beyond the lily-white base, although it probably helps in Florida. Two, he looks so young to me I keep wondering where his mama is.
I never thought I’d say this, but I think strategically for 2016 right now Hillary looks like a best bet.
I know it’s really silly to do this now, btw.
Cassidy
@Schlemizel: It’s not for a lack of want. 1) Conservatives, generally, lack the will or “courage” to put their money where their mouth is. 2) The FBI and Secret Service are really, really good at their jobs.
GregB
@beltane:
I noticed that there weren’t any Romney ads in NH during the Patriot’s game yesterday.
Nate Silver does have NH in an over 80% chance of an Obama victory in NH.
*Just re-checked 538 and he’s moved NH to over 86% chance for an Obama win.
Romney is collapsing in the battleground states.
Geeno
Unfortunately, all this will teach the billionaires is that you can’t buy an election running a loser of a candidate like Romney. They’ll find a better candidate and be right back next election, and a better candidate just might know what to do with all that money.
Cassidy
FWIW, here in Jacksonville/ North Florida, I hardly see any Romney stickers. I see lots of “NOBAMA” and the like, but very little pro-Romney.
cmorenc
@c u n d gulag:
Ryan thought accepting the VP slot was a no-lose proposition:
1) WORST CASE: Romney-Ryan lose narrowly with Ryan getting a significant amount of credit for uniting the party with energetic enthusiasm and helping the campaign get back on the right tactical and message track. Ryan gets inside track to GOP nomination in 2016.
2) BEST CASE: Romney-Ryan wins, giving Ryan inside track to nomination in 2020 following end of second Romney term, in the meantime cementing his status as the ideological and charismatic guru of the Administration and party, wielding considerable influence on domestic policy during a Romney Administration.
WHAT RYAN DID NOT FORESEE is the extent to which the greatly elevated, amplified exposure that came with joining the ticket would also attract more demanding, less forgiving scrutiny of inaccuracies, contradictions, or prevarications that were allowed to pass below the radar when he was a House Committee chair. Ryan found himself getting called on things he formerly got away with, sometimes things he knew were lies he considered politically advantageous, but often perhaps things he had successfully deceived even himself on.
GregB
Meanwhile when you lose Rasmussen you are in deep doo-doo.
“John Harwood @JohnJHarwood: See Rasmussen 50-45 Obama this am MT @AshleyRParker: Romney pollster warns: “Don’t get too worked up about latest polling.” Never good sign.”
Cassidy
@cmorenc: Ryan is still going to come out smelling like a rose on this one. For one, he’s treated as policy guru by the
slobberring flufferspress. Two, all his BS lies now are going to be completely forgotten after the election and disappear down the media gloryhole. Lastly, this loss is going to be blamed on Romney and his inadequacy. Ryan will do the “what me?” shrug and pretend that he had nothing to do with it and his aforementioned admirers will go along with it.Ryan will be the GOP frontrunner in 2016.
Kay
I saw the first Crossroads ad of the big new push yesterday and it sucks.
It’s generic, not specific to Ohio, and it’s just a droning recitation of inflated stats on unemployment and debt, set against a background of people with their head in their hands, despairing.
Jesus. For all that money one would think they could come up with an ad that mentions something or other about the state they’re running it in, some creativity, some energy.
Not to mention this message directly contradicts Kasich’s message, which is “I created all the jobs in Ohio”.
The GOP is full of grifters and con artists. I think they’re ripping off their billionaire donors.
jibeaux
@Cassidy: I’m not saying you’re wrong, but that would be an even dumber pick than Romney in my book. It’s effectively doubling down on the “conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed” and completely ignores that Medicare = third rail of politics. I mean, yeah, that’s the ticket, Republicans!
Cassidy
@jibeaux: You’re absolutely right, but I think that sometimes, when we of rational thought and logic are discussing political tactics, we forget we’re dealing with true believers. They have two choices: double down or explore the notion that they’re whole life philosophy mught be wrong.
MattF
@Kay: The trick that a successful con artist pulls off is to convince people that they are on the inside, pulling a fast one on the dopes. Rove, particularly, seems to have this down to a science. Not Romney, though– he may have convinced his wife, but probably not his horse.
Cacti
@c u n d gulag:
I think he’s vain enough to think that he won’t be covered with the loser-stink in 2016.
the Conster
@Raven:
Yup. He’s got a level of detail that had to have been vetted by both CBS (Dan Rather, anyone?) and the WH before he could share it. That little bit about the woman at the CIA and the old plane that was used by Carter’s mission in Iran – that’s the WH’s doing. He’d never know about the plane thing.
Kay
@MattF:
It’s the “from 30,000 feet” nature of all of the ads that come out of these Republican outside groups. It’s like they’re speaking to The Nation, but this is a big, diverse country and I think local matters. It just so reeks of DC punditry and panels of national experts sort of invading your state, Crossroads.
Obama ran an ad here with a Toledo auto worker where he was driving to work, and you saw the exit signs with the familiar place names flashing by overhead, just as you would if you were in his seat, driving.
joes527
Nate Silver has Willard’s chances at 19.3% this morning. His model is obviously broken.
No matter how bad he does, there is no way Mitt’s chances go below 27%
cmorenc
@Cassidy:
Agree that Ryan will likely have the inside track for the GOP nomination in 2016 if Romney loses.
Disagree that Ryan did himself no lasting damage from his obvious prevarications that won’t come back to haunt him in 2016. Before he joined the ticket, he had a reputation as not just a true-believer ideologue with a wonky grasp of the fine details of budgetary policy, but as a wonk with honest integrity (albeit an undeserved one). Ryan has permanently lost that by telling so many obvious, trivial to debunk whoppers that his reputation for integrity has suffered substantial permanent damage, even in the flawed, complacent world of the village MSM. His statements won’t be given any presumptive deference for good-faith argument in 2016, and so any significant misstatements he makes will be dug into much more aggressively and be given much more focus by the MSM than they would have otherwise, in analogous fashion to how Rick Perry will have a tough time in 2016 avoiding steps that reawaken the narrative that he’s a bit stupid.
Cassidy
@cmorenc: I see what you’re saying, but I think that only matters to us. The media is being harder because they’re insulted; not because they’ve found some semblance of conscience. The howls of “liberal media” have already started and Ryan isn’t stupid. He’ll cater some BBQ and buy a tire swing and all will be right for the 2016 horse race.
c u n d gulag
@Schlemizel:
Chris Christie, for one.
And poor Jeb – if only he could change his last name, HE might have run.
Instead, he’ll wait until ’16, hoping the lingering stench from the onion, jalepeno, and limburger cheese omlette fart in an elevator, that was his brothers Presidency, goes away enough for him to show his face in public again.
It’s going to be interesting, if they lose, if they’ll realized that they’ve gone too far with their Conservatism, or double-down.
My bet’s on doubling-down – their base is even crazier and more stupid than their political “stars.”
FlipYrWhig
@jibeaux: Also, as my wife pointed out, Rubio’s hair looks like it’s already starting to go, and with it will go his heartthrob status.
FlipYrWhig
@c u n d gulag: I wouldn’t rule out, in terms of up-and-comers, Scott Walker or Scott Brown. Neither is any more intelligent than a load of bricks, but they’ve each shown the ability to win in what ought to be hostile territory for their party.
IowaOldLady
It’s odd, but I think Ryan’s trivial lie about his marathon time really hurt him. Unlike the budget stuff, it’s easy for people to recognize, and they figure if someone will lie about an easily checkable fact like that, you can’t trust them on anything.
Elie
@MattF:
THIS —
Romney just reflects the organization and “soul” of the Republican Party… HE is their mirror so the finger pointing needs to begin right there!
c u n d gulag
@FlipYrWhig:
That’s why Warren’s got to stick a knife in him by tying Brown to the rest of the Republicans.
If he loses in MA this year, his Presiential asperations are toast.
I can see Walker being at the top of their list in ’16. He’s already a wingnut hero – he took on the Liberals, and won. TWICE!
KeithinOhio
@jibeaux: jiboeaux Hilary will not run. After she retires from her SOS post she is going to live as a civilian. Governor O’malley of Maryland is our best bet.
J.W. Hamner
Glad Sam Wang is getting his due this election cycle (Kevin Drum cites him frequently too)… I was a little bitter in 2008 that everybody was going nuts about Nate Silver’s Rube Goldberg concoction when what Sam Wang was doing was completely transparent and statistically bad ass.
Elie
@IowaOldLady:
So true. It is revealing of something deeper. If it hadn’t been preceded by the bald faced lies in his speech, it may have just been overlooked. Those lies coupled with the time on the marathon and mountain climbing just painted a picture of character flaw… and the Republicans already have a flawed character in Mitt Romney.
FlipYrWhig
@c u n d gulag: I think Walker would have run this year if not for the Madison action getting big headlines (spurred IMHO by the events in Egypt). No one is more in synch with the Koch Brothers than Scott Walker. He’s clearly stupid but that doesn’t hold back most Republicans, does it?
catclub
@Cassidy: That might work, but if there is one thing the media does, it is hang onto old themes that worked once. So if Lyin Ryan sticks this year, some media with a memory but no observational skills will bring it up interminably in the future.
xian
@J.W. Hamner: this
JGabriel
mistermix:
Well, yes and no. Nate’s model is finer-grained and takes a little more risk in its projections by trying to predict the outcome of each state. Sam Wang’s PEC model didn’t try to determine whether Indiana and/or Missouri would go for Obama in 2008 but decided that one would and one wouldn’t, so it got the EV right, without specifying the exact state breakdown — if I understand Dr. Wang’s model correctly.
I think the models are more complementary of each other than competitive, though I suspect Sam and Nate might disagree.
.
Matt McIrvin
The best thing about Nate Silver’s site in 2008 was the road reports about the campaign. But they’re not doing that this year.
grandpa john
@Butch: then you probably never will understand
JenJen
@Matt McIrvin: I was just thinking the same thing! IIRC, didn’t they start those a little later, though? I remember when they were in Ohio commenting on how they could never seem to find a McCain office that was actually open and operating, but I’m thinking that was in October?
grandpa john
@Geeno: So where is this “Better” candidate? I thin k if they had one better, they would have run him/her this year.
Cassidy
@grandpa john: There are several candidates better than Romney and more popular amongst the base who made tactical decisions not to run this time. As stated above, no matter the circumstances, unseating an incumbent is not easy. In 2016 it’s open season and they can mask their crazy with a Democratic Primary that will be the focus of the media.
grandpa john
@cmorenc: Which is why you seldom see house members on national tickets. they lack experience, they usually, as Ryan did and does,vastly overrate their abilities and intelligence.Ryan has never run even a statewide race so letting his ego overrule head, he has bnow become the proverbial “Babe in the woods” who is about to begin his schooling in Politics 101 how to campaign without looking like a total ass.
grandpa john
@cmorenc: personally, I think that Ryan has reached the Zenith of his political career and by 2016 will be “Paul who? Like so many other pundit picked “Bonus babies, never to rise above the AA level.
Schlemizel
@c u n d gulag: If those are the GOP stars they really are completely screwed. Crust Crusty couldn’t win if he had Huckleberry’s gastric bypass and a bundle of kittens tied to him. Jeb is a bigger moron in person that his idiot brother and Bush is a dirty word in the GOP for every one of its definitions.
They either have to find some Governor or Congressthing we have not heard of or develop one fast.
Bubblegum Tate
Apparently Dick Morris has a poll that shows Romney comfortably ahead. Wingnuts are, as you might image, fapping furiously to it.
Heliopause
@JGabriel:
Interesting concept, stat nerd competition over such a thing.
Fact is, a somewhat engaged layperson can simply go to Wikipedia, print out the results of the previous election in a little table, get a general sense of how it compares to the polling in the current cycle, control for his/her own personal emotions as best as possible, and come up with the correct binary result virtually 100% of the time.
It’s hard to think of any real world consequences for the microscopic differences in the predictions of Wang and Silver. Neither of their models will capture a poorly designed ballot in a particular state, whether the official in charge of recounts is a shameless political hack, the partisan composition of state and federal supreme courts, and so on. I read Nate Silver now and then for a little insight on some issue or other, but he comes up with very little relevant electoral information that I wouldn’t already intuitively know just by paying attention.
Mnemosyne
@Schlemizel:
And Huckabee is completely out of the running — too many dead cops and dead rape victims for him to explain away. He’s his own walking Willie Horton ad.
Seanly
I had mentioned PEC in a previous thread (another BJ’er had recommended it a while back). I’ve had enough prob & stats classes to be more a nuisance than a help, but I prefer Sam Wang’s approach to Silver’s. Sam aggregates the data much more cleanly and allows a quicker recognition of changes.
One of the problem’s with Silver’s approach is that he’s bound into the polling time frames. So five thirty eight was basing convetion & VP bounces off older data “stuck” in his model whereas PEC was just looking at day-to-day numbers.
I still think Silver does some very fine work, but there’s a too-cute-by-half feel to it.
AnneW
@joes527:
The 19.3% is his probability of winning, not his projected percentage of the vote.
Kilkee
@Bubblegum Tate: They are indeed, and here and there I have jumped in to remind them that Dick Morris not only “guaranteed” that the 2008 race would come down to Hillary v. Condoleeza Rice, but managed to concoct an entire BOOK around such insanity, and sell it to the rubes!