538

[whoman69]

The latest 538 simulations have Obama winning 90.9% of the time with an average of 313.0 EC. The popular vote is seen as 50.8-48.3 or a 2.5 point lead for Obama.

The closest state contests are:
Florida 50.3% Obama
North Carolina 74.4% Romney
Virginia 79.4% Obama
Colorado 79.7% Obama
Iowa 84.3% Obama
New Hampshire 84.6% Obama

The following battleground states are now considered safe Obama meaning more than a 90% probability:
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Nevada
Ohio

Obama has 303 EC at least 79%
Obama has 332 EC at least 50%

[The Mayor]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I was guessing it would be 50-50 all along.. then Akin showed his ass and I switched it to 51-49... I'd be surprised if 51-49 doesn't end up the final number... but hell we could see 50-50 and 269-269 electoral split with split Pres/VP ticket that keeps the Senate with the Dems in charge! how weird would that be! (yes, I know that is very very very unlikely, but it is possible)

I would bet that Joe Manchin then switches to GOP!

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

wow, that's actually a pretty scathing indictment of 538. To be clear, I'm not anti-538 (even though it is a fact that Silver is an ardent Obama supporter) I am however, skeptical of the weight people give to a model that worked ONCE (2008) and is otherwise completely unproven.

EDIT: For all those who are hard core 538ers... if Romney wins big (doubtful) will you switch allegiance to a site like unskewedpolls.com that is predicting just that? (342-196) I for one will call it like I see it, both sites are unproven and full of guesswork and taking them as bible truth is just idiotic,

I put a lot of weight on the methodology. If 538 proves wrong, I don't think it will be by much, because the methodology is strong. If he did turn out to be way off it would be due to some fundamental change in the electorate. I wouldn't switch to unskewedpolls no matter what. A bad method that gets the right answer for the wrong reason isn't likely to be reliable in the future.

I did't find the National Review article that convincing. For example, they criticize the low weight given to the Rasmussen poll, but they didn't mention why it is given a low weight. It is because they don't include any cell-phone-only users in their polls That was fine in 2000, but this is 2012. That poll has a weak methodology and therefore gets a low weight. The National Review has a strong right tilt, so its not surprising that they don't like a method that shows their guy down. If they are going to criticize Nate Silver, they are going to have to at least step up to his level of nerdiness.

[The Mayor]

Originally Posted by cdcox

I put a lot of weight on the methodology. If 538 proves wrong, I don't think it will be by much, because the methodology is strong. If he did turn out to be way off it would be due to some fundamental change in the electorate. I wouldn't switch to unskewedpolls no matter what. A bad method that gets the right answer for the wrong reason isn't likely to be reliable in the future.

I did't find the National Review article that convincing. For example, they criticize the low weight given to the Rasmussen poll, but they didn't mention why it is given a low weight. It is because they don't include any cell-phone-only users in their polls That was fine in 2000, but this is 2012. That poll has a weak methodology and therefore gets a low weight. The National Review has a strong right tilt, so its not surprising that they don't like a method that shows their guy down. If they are going to criticize Nate Silver, they are going to have to at least step up to his level of nerdiness.

The guy who wrote the piece is @numbersmuncher on twitter.... Can you be more nerdy?

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by The Mayor

The guy who wrote the piece is @numbersmuncher on twitter.... Can you be more nerdy?

He did not demonstrate a very good understanding of the 538 methodology... was that ignorance or deceit?

[mnchiefsguy]

Luntz's focus group gives Romney the win on the economics, and to Obama on the foreign policy. The group also seemed much more incline to vote on the basis of the economy.

[WoodDraw]

I haven't read the article yet, but I believe 538 runs a standard month half life for all polls. So if they're weighted different, it's probably do to some sample size overlaps/problems, or poll reliability issues.

[The Mayor]

Originally Posted by cdcox

He did not demonstrate a very good understanding of the 538 methodology... was that ignorance or deceit?

Can you explain how the author is wrong in his criticism of the PPP weights? That's the part that I find intriguing.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by The Mayor

Can you explain how the author is wrong in his criticism of the PPP weights? That's the part that I find intriguing.

Silver has an article where he explains why he doesn't correct for self-ID of party affiliation, even though many polls collect that data.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...partisan-bias/

So the National Review article was bringing up statistics (self-ID of party affiliation) that Silver has already shown to be not useful. Again shows a poor understanding of the the 538 methodology by National Review article.

As far as whether a particular poll has a lean or not, I believe he compares changes in poll x over a given time period compared to changes in polls y, z, and w over a similar time period.

Remember, every poll has a sample error of unknown magnitude. By comparing polls against one another and considering their historical biases, you can smooth out some of that sampling error. You don't want to smooth it all out because you'll smooth signal instead of noise. But to the extent you can smooth noise your predictions will improve. In my understanding, that is what the 538 method was doing with the PPP weighting.

[BigRedChief]

Heard from the local Dem party that Obama's internal #'s say he still has a chance at Florida. That's why tonight he is in Tampa. Why? 18 million Puerto Rican immigrants that are going 70/30 for Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...y.html?hpid=z9

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Heard from the local Dem party that Obama's internal #'s say he still has a chance at Florida. That's why tonight he is in Tampa. Why? 18 million Puerto Rican immigrants that are going 70/30 for Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...y.html?hpid=z9

[whoman69]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Yet you still think Romney will win Ohio.

[whoman69]

Latest update came out late last night, which they've done the last two nights. This may be a trend for them as the election comes closer and polls start to increase.

Obama is seen as the victor in 68.1% of scenarios, down slightly from 70.3% the day prior. The most competitive states are:

Colorado (50.5% red)
Virginia (51% blue)
Iowa (64.4% blue)
New Hampshire (66.6% blue)
Florida (69.4% red)
Ohio (70.4% blue)
Nevada (72.8% blue)

Every other state is over 80%.
Obama has 247 EC at least 80% to Romney 206
Obama has 271 EC at least 70% to Romney 206
Obama has 281 EC at least 60% to Romney 235

22 EC are less than 55% for either candidate.

[LOCOChief]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Heard from the local Dem party that Obama's internal #'s say he still has a chance at Florida. That's why tonight he is in Tampa. Why? 18 million Puerto Rican immigrants that are going 70/30 for Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifest...y.html?hpid=z9

I don't pay attention to polling, I think its BS but I'm sure not seeing the Obama love down here, not even close. Clients, friends, family, rotary, shit I don't know anyone that's voting for Obama. I've seen a couple Obama signs in the neighborhood but for every one there are 10-15 Romney. Probably doesn't mean anything but if my little gulf snapshot is any indication Romney owns FL.

That bogus letter that went out to registered republicans questioning their citizenship isn't going to help you guys down here.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by LOCOChief

That bogus letter that went out to registered republicans questioning their citizenship isn't going to help you guys down here.

Just read up on what those letters are about and it hardly looks like an honest effort at voter suppression. Many of the letters were sent to Republican donors. How many illegal voters actually donate to campaigns?

However the 2600 voters Florida's purge sought to remove from voting rolls that was later whittled down to a whopping 200 did look like an honest attempt of voter suppression.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by LOCOChief

I don't pay attention to polling, I think its BS but I'm sure not seeing the Obama love down here, not even close. Clients, friends, family, rotary, shit I don't know anyone that's voting for Obama. I've seen a couple Obama signs in the neighborhood but for every one there are 10-15 Romney. Probably doesn't mean anything but if my little gulf snapshot is any indication Romney owns FL.

That bogus letter that went out to registered republicans questioning their citizenship isn't going to help you guys down here.

I conceded Florida to Romney about a month ago due to the redneck vote.

The candidates especially presidential visits, are not fooling around with personal appearances at this point in the election. 12 days out, candidates don't usually make appearances in states they have no realistic chance in winning. Yet, Obama is appearing tonight here in Tampa. Why would he do this if the Obama campaign doesn't think they have a shot a Florida?