danivon wrote:It will be interesting to see what Gallup reports. Apparently they will survey until Sunday and then publish a pre-election poll and prediction. Of the main national pollsters, they are the ones most generous to Romney at the moment. I believe that's because their 'likely voter' test is more strict than other companies.

Everything I've read suggests it is other polls not screening. Some of the most pro-Obama polls eliminate a "whopping" 4% of RV to get their LV results.

The theory that undecideds will opt for the challenger may not be true

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb ... 61595.html

Ray Jay wrote:I think you need to read the op ed. There is a tremendous amount of detail; it doesn't seem like a puff piece to me.

OK, I did read Rove's piece. While there is some detail, it seems to be contradicted by evidence given here:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/nov-1-the-simple-case-for-saying-obama-is-the-favorite/#more-37035

Where actual polls are listed and averaged, rather than just blanket claims of total numbers.

Which leads me back to my point: Days before an election, the LAST person on EARTH you should be taking seriously is Carl Rove. He may know his stuff, but he'd only say the truth if it helped his cause, and I don't think he would hesitate to weave a story out of complete fiction if he thought it would help that cause.

Why? He predicted Obama would win over McCain.

Michael Barone, no slacker on political knowledge, is picking Romney. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/02/m ... obama-223/

Barone's a conservative, but has a vast reservoir of info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Almana ... n_Politics

And it's "Karl."

Well, conservatives did not particularly like McCain so Rove's prediction of a mcCain loss is not comparable to now. There is also 2000 where Rove was telling reporters that Bush was going to get over 300 electoral votes, and had Bush campaigning in California (California!) because it was supposedly in play. George is spot-on in his take on Herr Karl.

freeman2 wrote:Well, conservatives did not particularly like McCain so Rove's prediction of a mcCain loss is not comparable to now. There is also 2000 where Rove was telling reporters that Bush was going to get over 300 electoral votes, and had Bush campaigning in California (California!) because it was supposedly in play. George is spot-on in his take on Herr Karl.

He was running Bush's campaign, so, duh, he picked Bush. The last-minute DUI revelation tightened things.

Geo went to Silver. That's all you all have.

This is not baseball. In an election, more than stats are involved.

And, even there, Silver is ridiculous. Obama may win Ohio, but it's far less likely than Silver projects. If Obama wins VA, even Axlerod will be (privately) surprised.

That's the thing--Romney needs to win Ohio, Virginia and Florida. So Romney could win Ohio, but Obama has at least as good of a chance to take Florida or Virginia. The scenario where Romney wins all three is not probable.

I wonder why that DUI conviction was a big deal--didn't everyone know Bush was a drunk from his 20s until he turned 40?

freeman2 wrote:That's the thing--Romney needs to win Ohio, Virginia and Florida. So Romney could win Ohio, but Obama has at least as good of a chance to take Florida or Virginia.

Rubbish. The race will come down to Ohio/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania. Obama needs to win all three.

This is where Silver falls apart. He relies almost entirely on State polls. According to him, VA is 67% for Obama. Ohio is 83%. I'd take those odds if anyone cares to give them. Wisconsin 94.2%; PA 96.6%.

Again, anyone wants to give me those odds, I'm in.

When Silver puts FL at 54.8% Romney that's akin to a lock. Why? Because he skews everything so far to Obama, that any place he even slightly favors Romney is a slam dunk.

The scenario where Romney wins all three is not probable.

He'll win FL and VA. Ohio is going to be much closer.

I'll give you even odds that Romney won't win all three of Ohio, Florida and Virginia

freeman2 wrote:I'll give you even odds that Romney won't win all three of Ohio, Florida and Virginia

Well then, you don't really believe in your boy, Nate Silver. He'd have to give me better than even odds. In fact, based on his percentages, I would think the trifecta would be worth about 50:1. Put up or (don't).

Btw, the Ohio poll Marist released showing Obama +6:

the D/R/I is 38/29/32. In 2008, the exit polls showed a split of 39/31/30, and in 2010 36/37/28.

So, if you believe 2012 is like 2008, then maybe it's a valid poll . . .

2010 was a midterm poll. It's common for protest votes, and for government supporters to sit at home as they don't see it as being as important. 2012 will not be the same as 2010.

I never like to bet for less than even odds. In any case, proposing a bet is a way to ascertain a person's real beliefs rather than their hopes. Somehow, when money is involved, the rational (rather than partisan) side of a person's brain gets triggered.

danivon wrote:2010 was a midterm poll. It's common for protest votes, and for government supporters to sit at home as they don't see it as being as important. 2012 will not be the same as 2010.

Correct.

And, it won't come close to 2008, which was an Obama wave.

freeman2 wrote:I never like to bet for less than even odds. In any case, proposing a bet is a way to ascertain a person's real beliefs rather than their hopes. Somehow, when money is involved, the rational (rather than partisan) side of a person's brain gets triggered.

That explains why you so rapidly back down from your supposed "faith" in Silver. If you believe him, there is a snowball's chance that Romney can win OH, VA, and FL.

You should not care about the odds because it's a sure thing--Silver says so.