I’m too lazy to even link much.
1. Romney has lost is lead in the RCP head-to-head poll average. Obama is ahead by .1% so call it a tie. Obama’s job approval is just about 50%. Obama is leading in most but not all of the swing state polls.
2. Ross Douthat explains why the differences between the state polls that have leaned Obama and the national polls that have leaned slightly Romney are using different turnout models.
3. Karl Rove is predicting a 3% Romney plurality in that national popular vote. If it was Dick Morris I would just dismiss it as an attention getting stunt from a guy who makes his living reassuring and fundraising from right-leaning voters and knowing he will still get bookings regardless of whether he is right in the end. Rove plays the reassuring game too, but I think it is more important to his brand to get the election day call right. It is the difference between being a television commenter and a television clown. There is a reason why Fox News doesn’t put Morris on when Chris Wallace or Bret Baier are doing serious political news coverage. So there’s that.
November 1st, 2012 | 7:40 pm
With 8 out of 10 Americans thinking that Obama has handled Superstorm Sandy well, Romney’s campaign seems to have lost it’s “Mitt-mentum” (http://goo.gl/wlX3t). I’m yet to see the maths that gives a Romney victory. I’m still expecting a 332 victory for Obama (electoral map: http://goo.gl/FsfQv)
November 1st, 2012 | 7:57 pm
“I’m (sic) yet to see the maths ….”
I suspect somewhere in the bowels of the risk analysis department of Lehman Bros circa 2007, there was a whiz kid who, when told that their assets were junk, pointed to the bell curve on his computer and said the same thing.
To paraphrase a famous epistemological saying “the map is not the territory”. The fact is there’s a poll out there for everyone to choose from depending on their preferred outcome.
For the rare fellow who possesses the powers of recalling previous statements of analytical hubris, this race isn’t about the polls, but what’s unfolding on the ground, of which we’ll only know about after Nov 6th.
Until then statements proclaiming whose pet pollster is correct are better characterized as scientific hypotheticals that remain to be empirically validated only on or after that date.
I believe this is what is meant by the term ‘scientific skepticism’.
November 1st, 2012 | 7:58 pm
Having said that, my hypothetical is that the polls are systematically oversampling democrats.
Romney with > 300 on the EC.
You read it here first.
November 1st, 2012 | 8:25 pm
It will be glorious to wake up on Wednesday and not have to worry about all this pseudo-event polling nonsense, and the media can instead focus on either how wonderful Obama is, or how racist America is…
November 1st, 2012 | 11:34 pm
I just had the pleasure of reading Karl Rove’s remarks in the Wall Street Journal. I respect Rove more than any other analyst of the other political persuasion. He predicts a Romney victory by 279 Electoral Votes. But, more importantly, he hasn’t a thing to say about which states Romney will carry to make that magic number.
Neither does Pseudoplotinus. Or any of the other predictors of the rise of Romney’s star here. I would be far more convinced that they know what they are talking about if they did.
On my side, the only remark I will make is that the most reliable at calling these races in the past have been the state poll aggregators. And they give very clear indications of who has the advantage in what state.
November 2nd, 2012 | 8:58 am
I vote with Pseudoplotinus and I say Romney carries Ohio, Wisconsin, and Iowa. Having visited Pennsylvania recently I believe he will comfortably carry that state also. That ought to get him to 300.
November 2nd, 2012 | 9:48 am
Rasmussen sez Romney has lost his national lead. The state polls don’t offer much reason for hope. But hope I still do.
November 2nd, 2012 | 9:58 am
Romney: 56-43!
My latest polling numbers. I’m giving in and voting for Mitt, after a long talk with she-who-must-be-obeyed.
I have some hope for Mitt that he and the conservatives that will be swept into nat’l office on his coattails will actually do the right thing to save the nation.
We will not have a free state if Mr. Sorento gets four more years.
November 2nd, 2012 | 10:15 am
Joseph, I am debating over to what detail I ought to give my reasons for my prediction. I will only lightly touch on them now, as they would only have any merit if events turn out to prove me correct.
My reasoning is based not on who I think has a more statistically rigorous account of the voting outcome, but what I believe to be an unfolding paradigm that is still playing itself out in the country, and that I suspect will prove particularly disruptive in this years election.
In brief, I believe Barack Obama’s candidacy in 2008 was simptomatic of an emerging cultural phenomena that, due to the new dynamics of a hyper-networked world, is characterized by ever larger collective manifestations of hysteria. This shows itself in the form of the sort of collective wishful thinking that gives rise to enormous fiscal, cultural and now political bubbles. I believe this will be the continuing phenomena of our society going forward.
Nassim Taleb’s book, Black Swan, meditates in detail on the uselessness of statistics when the statistical models are operating on paradigms that are changing beneath the feet of the statistician. I believe our pollsters are this years equivalent to the risk analysis analysis quants of the early 2000′s. And I see the Obama candidicacy as a political equivalent to the subprime bubble that popped to such devestating effect to our economy.
I don’t believe Obama will be the end of this trend, just the latest manifestation, after which a new phenomena will emerge on the horizon which will be the newest object of collective adoration/fascination/consumption.
November 2nd, 2012 | 10:20 am
Put another way, statisticians are trying to predict this years election based on some notion of the turn-out model of 2008 which I would analogize to risk analysts basing their models of risk on a previous paradigm that no longer applies. The bubble is popping, we just won’t know it until after November 6.
November 2nd, 2012 | 10:58 am
Well, that’s certainly a very cogent and respectable reason, and I’m not inclined to refute it. I’d be more inclined to think Romney will win if he had displayed more of the “leadership” character to exploit it. But I haven’t made my own prediction for a milder version of much the same reasons, and the fact that Obama has been far more realistic about the limits of the job than he was in 2008. It’s hard to be charismatic and do this as well.
November 2nd, 2012 | 11:54 am
In 2008 the Dems were hugely fired up, indies voted clearly Dem, and the GOP was massively demoralized. No one doubted who would win.
This year the GOP is incredibly fired up, indies are huge for Romney, and the Dem base is feeling meh. Yet we’re supposed to think it’s still a Dem+8 country, and Obama is a shoe-in.
We’ll see in a few days. The Obama campaign sure isn’t acting like any winning campaign I’ve ever seen, but the universe is always capable of surprising…
November 2nd, 2012 | 1:52 pm
“I’m giving in and voting for Mitt, after a long talk with she-who-must-be-obeyed.”
WOW! Mittmentum now making in-roads into the political carmudgeon demographic!
The man’s unstoppable!
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact