Getting tougher for Romney

ᔥ FiveThirtyEight

Nate Silver has Obama’s chances of winning in november at an all time high after several state polls came through this week. Some says that it is because of the millions in advertising that Obama and his SuperPACs are spending. Nate isn’t so sure about that:

The effects of advertising can be ephemeral, however, which is one reason to take a longer view of the polls, and the other factors that are pertinent in the state, rather than to fixate on the most recent set of numbers. Meanwhile, it isfar from clear that Mr. Obama’s campaign and his affiliated “Super PACs” can sustain an advertising advantage throughout the balance of the campaign. If so, Mr. Romney might poised to rebound in them.

Nevertheless, Mr. Romney’s campaign is not working from the position of strength in these states that it might have envisioned. It’s the vote in November that counts – not the polls in August – but they represent the most conspicuous sign that incumbent presidents are hard to defeat, and that Mr. Romney has some work left to do to win the Electoral College.

  • davewin

    Maybe Nate needs to look a little wider for his comments. There are any number of prognosticators prepared to go the other way. I prefer to wait until the day after the elections.

    • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

      Nate is pretty apolitical…he is a statistician…and he is uncannily accurate.

      Nate is simply looking at the numbers and nothing else. 

      • davewin

         Then I wonder where he gets the numbers from. There are any number of similar people  in the States who seriously believe the other way. There is certainly work left to do for Romney, but I am increasingly of the opinion Obama is toast. Regards.

      • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

        From all the polls in the US…and applying statistical analysis. go read his Wiki page for information on his methodology.

      • le sphincter

        Then again  the portion who actually get out to vote is way down on the 80% we get here.

      • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

        davewin…this is his credentials…pretty impressive

        “In 2007, writing under the pseudonym “Poblano”, Silver began to publish analyses and predictions related to the 2008 United States presidential election. At first this work appeared on the political blog Daily Kos, but in March 2008 Silver established his own website, FiveThirtyEight.com. By summer of that year, after he revealed his identity to his readers, he began to appear as an electoral and political analyst in national print, online, and cable news media.
        The accuracy of his November 2008 presidential election predictions—he correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states—won Silver further attention and commendation. The only state he missed was Indiana, which went for Barack Obama by 1%. He also correctly predicted the winner of all 35 Senate races that year.
        In April 2009, he was named one of The World’s 100 Most Influential People by Time.”

  • Mitch82

    Here comes the daily Ron Paul interjection.

    Republicans were lukewarm about Romney 3 months ago, and it’s essentially a given, even by the right-wing Fox News, that he’s a no-hope against Obama now. Unless there’s an Alex Jones-esque conspiracy theory confirming Left-Right co-operation in keeping Obama in place.. Tampa is going to fall apart for Romney.

    Dreamer, you say? I’m not afraid to dream that the Americans might be smart enough to elect someone who won’t hold down Control+P on the Fed’s printing press for the next 4 years. Might be naive, but the biggest political cattle-prod is how your wallet will be affected. They’ve gotta wake up some day.

    • le sphincter

      Last time I checked the Federal Reserve was independent. The CTRLP key will be pushed no matter who wins, even Ron Paul.
      ..
       Federal Reserve is independent within government in that “its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.” I cant believe how clueless you guys are

      • Mitch82

        Okay. So Ron Paul’s “Audit The Fed” bill, supported by 80% of public opinion and overwhelmingly passed through congress, is just a token measure to make it look like the government is trying to do something about the trojan horse, right?

        The Fed is a virus. It’s own rules, as they designed them, they are proposing a system that is designed to fail. Ron Paul has spent his entire career fighting them. Yes, the Fed is “Independent” – that’s the fucking point that he’s fighting. The point is that in allowing an government sanctioned “independent” controller of the US economy, they realise that they fucked up the US economy while getting rich , and that they’re not happy about the current situation, because they got rich this time, and they’ll never get powerful again.The end game is 3 groups – those who deny what’s going on because they’ll gain from this, those who while deny what’s going on because they weren’t smart enough to get in on the scam before it became profitable, and those who weren’t looking to scam in the first place.

  • kiwiinamerica

    Cameron 

    Nate Silver’s model is only as good as the polls he enters
    in to it. The most recent swing state polls you refer to was the CBS/NYT/Quinnipiac
    poll of FL, OH and PA. There are serious methodological flaws with this poll
    that tilt the results in Obama’s favour. First off the poll is of Registered
    voters which even Nate Silver admits is give as +3% weighting to Democrats versus
    the more predictive Likely voter sample. 

    More significantly the samples in this poll are ridiculously
    weighted in favour of the Democrats. In the case of Florida this poll has a +9%
    Dem weighting. Now Gallup and Rasmussen do regular party ID polls off a likely
    voter screen and right now they both have the GOP and Dems at an even party ID
    of 36% each. In 2008 the average voter ID polls for FL were +3% to the Dems and
    the actual vote was +4% so Gallup and Rasmussen are pretty accurate. In the
    2010 mid-terms the actual voter turnout was even between the parties. To
    believe this poll is to believe that Obama has INCREASED his support by 5 or 6%
    since 2008. What planet are they on? The flaw in the sample was reinforced when
    they asked these participants how they voted in 2008 and it showed a Dem
    weighting of +13% or a massive 9% skew off the actual result.

    This flaw was repeated in Ohio and Pennsylvania. 

    This trend reached a farcical peak this week when Pew
    published a Registered voter nationwide head to head poll showing Obama up by
    10% from a sample that favoured Democrats by 19% when as I said the REAL spit is
    even! This poll is added to the RCP average that you and Silver use and it so
    it skewers the entire average further in Obama’s favour. The same day Rasmussen
    released ITS same daily nationwide tracking head to head poll but using a likely voter screen with a
    +3% Dem weighting and it puts Romney up by 3%! 

    Garbage in garbage out! 

    You really need to look at the crosstabs of each poll before
    you pin Obama’s re-election chances on polls that are so skewered.

    I’m intrigued by your bias in favour of Obama. If polls in
    NZ were skewered in favour of Labour like this you’d be trumpeting it from your
    blog but when it comes to the centre right candidate in the US you rush to
    publish anything that embarrasses him even when it’s flawed. Can you enlighten
    us as to what drives this? Romney’s religion? His support for traditional
    marriage?

  • 2ndAmendment

     essentially a given, even by the right-wing Fox News, that he’s a no-hope against Obama now.

    Not the Fox news I’ve been watching, nor any non-biased news source.  In fact, a couple of centre-left sites are already behaving as if Romney is the certain winner.

    Here’s something closer to the real story:

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/johnellis/can-obamas-chemical-warfare-keep-the-white-5krk


    The 2012 president election, boiled down to its remaining variables, is about two things: (1) white voters who voted for Barrack Obama last time and have since grown disillusioned and, (2) white voters who stayed home in 2008 rather than vote for John McCain but may vote this time. The Obama campaign’s goal is to make both groups stay home rather than vote. It’s not a “negative campaign” they’re running. It’s purposefully toxic. 

    If President Obama gets 40% of the white vote, he has a chance to win re-election. If President Obama gets 35% of the white vote, he’s finished. 

  • 2ndAmendment

    For example, for some bizarre reason, RealCommiePolitics has Wisconsin “Leans Osama”.   

    Wisconsin that threw out Russ Feingold last year, Wisconsin that elected Scott Walker and did not recall him, Wisconsin where unionism is pretty much illegal, Wisconsin where there will be no voter fraud because voter ID is the law —  Wisconsin that will go solidly for the GOP.   

    So if you believe RCP’s swingometer, Romney already has about 290 electoral votes in the bag.  

  • carpentaro

    What you said + the “undecided” usually breaks for the challenger [that'd be about 10%] and there is an enthusiasm factor, not many are as “fired up” about O as was in ’08.
    Some of the anecdotal evidence can be seen as results in special elections. Wisconsin broke harder for the “conservative” in a recall, and that’s in a very “progressive” state. New Mexico just elected a Republican [must have been off the peyote that day]. O goin’ down, he might be able to organize a community [Chicago, gun control failing murder outcome] with someone else’s $], but he has done not very well in organizing a country.

    Community organizers are not effective leaders. Remember that next time you see that on someones’ CV.  

29%