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%

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Tom.Jay61

Isn't it usually in the incumbent's favor to be tied?

Romney has also broke 50% at various times in various states, I don't think Obama has.

That's another red flag for B.O.

The "incumbent is in deep trouble below 50%" thing is a myth.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by alnorth

The "incumbent is in deep trouble below 50%" thing is a myth.

While that is an oversimplification.. historically the undecideds break 70/30 (or more) for the challenger. It all depends on if there really are enough undecideds left at this point... which I find a little hard to believe.

On a mostly unrelated note, Romney is still holding a substantial lead in the most recent national polls. +3, +1, +5 and -2 for an average of 1.75+ for Romney. I know at least one of those polls (the -2 one) has 6% undecided which as it has been shrinking has been overwhelmingly moving toward Romney. I am having a hard time getting my head around the idea that IF these polls are accurate and Romney truly is ahead by 2+ points nationally on election day he won't win electorally as well.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

While that is an oversimplification.. historically the undecideds break 70/30 (or more) for the challenger. It all depends on if there really are enough undecideds left at this point... which I find a little hard to believe.

On a mostly unrelated note, Romney is still holding a substantial lead in the most recent national polls. +3, +1, +5 and -2 for an average of 1.75+ for Romney. I know at least one of those polls (the -2 one) has 6% undecided which as it has been shrinking has been overwhelmingly moving toward Romney. I am having a hard time getting my head around the idea that IF these polls are accurate and Romney truly is ahead by 2+ points nationally on election day he won't win electorally as well.

yeah you are right, it is an oversimplification, I'm getting tired of seeing all these "Obama has only 48% so he's gonna lose! weee!!" posts.

You are closer to correct. An incumbent who is below 47% IS in serious trouble in my opinion. People forget that 3rd-party voters make up 2 or 3 percent, and undecideds dont go 100% to the challenger. If your guy challenging the incumbent is down 47-46 a week out, then you can feel pretty good about it.

In this election though, Obama's above 47 in most of the swing states and Romney's losing. Winning the popular vote will be cold comfort if he's ramping up enormous 25-30% winning margins in southern vote-sink states while Obama's voters are more evenly distributed.

edit: I'm rooting for the nightmare scenario you alluded to. I am not voting for either of these guys, but if Gary Johnson cant win, then I want chaos, anger, and anguish. I want Romney to CLEARLY win a substantial popular vote victory with the help of the south, but lose the electoral college. It'd be hilariously fun entertainment.

Sadly, I don't think it'll happen. I think Obama wins by a couple points. Many of the national polls are using a very poor methodology that often doesn't poll cell phones and overestimates the non-hispanic white vote. Gallup thinks non-hispanic whites will be 80%, which is just not going to be the case.

[whoman69]

The Obama odds have again increased. 538 gives Obama a 74.4% chance of victory while predicting a popular vote margin 50.3%-48.6% and an average EC count of 295.4.

Battleground states in order of competitiveness:
Virginia (54.1% Obama)
Colorado (57.3% Obama)
Florida (62.9% Romney)
New Hampshire (69.7% Obama)
Iowa (72.1% Obama)
Ohio (76.3% Obama)
Nevada (78.8% Obama)

All other states are at least 80% towards one candidate.

Obama has 247 EC at least 80%
" 271 EC at least 75%
" 277 EC at least 70%
" 281 EC at least 60%
" 303 EC at least 50%

Romney has 206 EC at least 80%
" 235 EC at least 60%

[KChiefer]

Nate Silver was on Bill Maher last night. Great ep overall. Not the over talking shitstorm it often becomes.

[Comrade Crapski]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

Nate Silver was on Bill Maher last night.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by alnorth

The "incumbent is in deep trouble below 50%" thing is a myth.

It's a myth in the same way that when you flip a coin twice you're not going to get two heads is a myth. Sure you can get two heads, but the odds against it.

[Aries Walker]

Ah, that'd be "Rosencrantzandguildensternanism".

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by Tom.Jay61

He was on Daily Show or Colbert also last week. I'm sure he'd go on Fox if they'd have him. He's promoting a book. Doubt he'd go on Limbaugh though.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by patteeu

It's a myth in the same way that when you flip a coin twice you're not going to get two heads is a myth. Sure you can get two heads, but the odds against it.

Actually, the odds are no more for or against the second flip being heads. Each flip of the coin is an independent event, and are not inter-related.

You can flip a coin 100 times. The first 99 times can be heads up, but the odds of the 100th toss is still 50/50 whether it will be heads or tails. Each flip is individualized, and the sample size is incredibly small. To establish proof of the 50/50 odds of the coin, the coin needs to be flipped millions of times to establish a sample size large enough to establish that conclusion.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Actually, the odds are no more for or against the second flip being heads. Each flip of the coin is an independent event, and are not inter-related.

You can flip a coin 100 times. The first 99 times can be heads up, but the odds of the 100th toss is still 50/50 whether it will be heads or tails. Each flip is individualized, and the sample size is incredibly small. To establish proof of the 50/50 odds of the coin, the coin needs to be flipped millions of times to establish a sample size large enough to establish that conclusion.

That's true, but it's beside the point. Before you flip the first coin, you have a 25% chance of flipping two heads, not a 50/50. You have a 75% chance of flipping either two tails or one of each.

[carlos3652]

Originally Posted by patteeu

That's true, but it's beside the point. Before you flip the first coin, you have a 25% chance of flipping two heads, not a 50/50. You have a 75% chance of flipping either two tails or one of each.

wouldnt it be 25% chance of flipping two heads or two tails and 50% of flipping one of each? im not smart - so i dont know -

[Aries Walker]

You're both right.

[Mr. Plow]

**** math.

[carlos3652]

Originally Posted by Aries Walker

You're both right.

yea, it makes sense now - lol - odds are ridiculous because when you state there is a 75% chance of flipping one of each or two tails... it seems like two tales is highly possible.. but realistically its the same chance of the original chance of getting two heads...

its just a mind teaser...