Bright Shiny States

Thanks for your dispatch from the Titanic. The ship is still going to sink.

Re Titanic–

Blogwhore:

http://kroydblog.blogspot.com/

Never let it be said that Mike Sherer wont go that extra mile to get that false equivalency in there. Lets see….Acorn registration fraud tearing the fabric of the country and undermining the election = “Georgia is in play”. Saying Obama was cheering on anti semetic speeches and making a false controversy over a tape that has been written about for over 6 months = Putting up ads in Arizona because Obama is within the margin of error there in some polls. Yeah those bad Obama people, man I just don’t see how anybody could support someone who is so negative.

snark

Scherer that is. Dang it all, no preview

What? Arizona is mostly for spite, but close. Obama leads in ND. GA is within the margin of error. Is ahead and tied a mirage to you? Your post doesn’t even make sense.

It’s funny. I remember when having lots of money was said to be of overwhelming importance. What is Obama supposed to do? Leave money on the table?
.
And McCain is so not worried about Arizona that he’s spending precious cash on RoboCalls. He also doesn’t care that Napolitano beats him, head to head, for Senate in 2010.
.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/31/11279/222/947/647893
.
(I’ve decided I like the one column look for comments, so I’m sticking with IE for awhile. Weird putting the periods in to force a paragraph when I’m getting carriage returns automatically when in an IE instance.)

Scherer, if you really wanted to do equivalence, you would quote Axelrod on why they’re spending in red states. Instead of, you know, making fun of the Obama campaign like a gigantic d0ucheb4g.

Based on the polls that I have seen an Obama win in Arizona or North Dakota is more likely then McCain winning PA. And yet the McCain campaign has spent so much time in PA they could pratically apply for residency status.

queen,

It not just that they are spending time in PA. Look at WHERE they are spending time. They are truly hoping that the backwoods come out in full force. Have you seen the new video from one of the back woods Pennsylvania rallys? Very sad

” Obama still has lots of money! Cold red states don’t hate Obama! McCain is in so much trouble he might lose his homestate! Obama has momentum!”

Yeah those are all so fake.

Michael, you might want to update this post, now that McCain has taken Obama’s “bait” and is now forced to campaign in his home state of Arizona this Monday. If he weren’t worried, would he be going there?

http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=1&articleID=60787

No, no, no — you are missing the point! The linked RCP data is ALL plus Obama for any poll conducted in October. ALL of the plus McCain polling is from a month and a half ago. This isn’t even a disagreement. It’s pure laziness and ignorance. Scherer hasn’t even thought through the data in his own links. C’mon. This is very, very dumb. How lame.

You are missing the point! The linked RCP data is ALL plus Obama for any poll conducted in October. ALL of the plus McCain polling is from a month and a half ago. Honestly, TIME shouldn’t have its name on such sloppy thinking. Oy.

I am referring to ND in the above.

Also, RCP doesn’t even calculate and averge for ND but Scherer cites it as a tie — because that poll is at the top where the averages usually are. Just really, really, grade school bad.

PNNTO,

Seriously just how far did Mike Scherer have to go to come up with that. I mean obviously he wanted to blog about the LA Times situation. But he knew he would have to use some other stuff to kind of lessen the sting of his disagreement with how McCain is handling that situation about a confidential source. So he says “hey I can use Acorn voter registration fraud and then just try to find something that Obama has done recently too”. LOL I wonder what the other false equivalent choices were.

1. Obama bought a pumpkin from a McCain supporter

2. Obama said he shared his pb n j but he only gave the smaller half

3. Obama joked that McCain supporters should wait till Nov 5th to vote.

4. Obama said his white half might want to vote for McCain

Feel free to come up with your own

Even if we accept Scherer’s premise that the spending in AZ is indeed a gimmick, it nevertheless sends an important message to supporters everywhere. It’s a reminder that what’s happening is in fact remarkable and encourages participation in what we hope will be a historic turning point. It may be a shiny object but if it encourages .5% additional turnout elsewhere, it will be money well spent.

PNNTO,

Seriously just how far did Mike Scherer have to go to come up with that. I mean obviously he wanted to blog about the LA Times situation. But he knew he would have to use some other stuff to kind of lessen the sting of his disagreement with how McCain is handling that situation about a confidential source. So he says “hey I can use Acorn voter registration fraud and then just try to find something that Obama has done recently too”. LOL I wonder what the other false equivalent choices were.

1. Obama bought a pumpkin from a McCain supporter

2. Obama said he shared his pb n j but he only gave the smaller half

3. Obama joked that McCain supporters should wait till Nov 5th to vote.

4. Obama said his white half might want to vote for McCain

Feel free to come up with your own

I restate that the biggest tragedy of Swampland going down when it did was that it denied us the pleasure of MS writing about the poor woman with the backwards “B”

Just playing devil’s advocate with the “equivalence” thing…
.
A typical Scherer post displays a McCain ad, and then mumbles about whether it’s valid.
.
This one is giving the Obama view, and then mumbling about its validity.
.
Is this progress?

Re: incandenzah’s Daily Courier link:
.
Prescott? McCain’s taking the easy way out. It’s all a bunch of old people, dumb sh!t flying students, and rednecks up there.
He should come down to Phoenix and talk to all us decadent dissidents.

I saw nothing gimmicky in those ads, Micheal. Fact is, well maybe I shouldn’t say ‘fact is’. After all, I’m addressing a Republican shill. Facts and Republicans don’t mix.
.
Ok. Scratch that. Heck! Forget it. I’ll just say this:
.
McCain’s toast.
.
See ya on the other side. I’m guessing you’ll have plenty of wounds to lick and sour grapes to throw.

I’ve only recently discovered Swampland (I don’t get out much.) So I figured the gigging of Sherer for his McCain infatuation was part partisan and part fun. But this alleged reasoning here is stunning in its simple-mindedness.

Faux rage of the LA Times and campaigning in Arizona are gimmicks? And equal ones at that?

What’s the poor boy going to do after Nov. 4? Watch weepie DVDs alone, eat ice cream from the carton and wonder if, maybe, just maybe, he should call Johnny just one more time? Just to hear his voice…

Dammit. That should be “his alleged reasoning”

How was that moderated?
Re: incandenzah’s Daily Courier link:
.
Prescott? McCain’s taking the easy way out. It’s all a bunch of old people, flying students, and rednecks up there.
He should come down to Phoenix and talk to all us dissidents.

sgwhiteinfla: Obama said he didn’t care for the breed of McCain’s dog. Said it wouldn’t hunt. Hardy har har.

Looks like McCain is easily distracted by “bright shiny objects”. I wonder if Obama will have to stop campaigning in red states to deal with the ACORN problem?

In reality, the polls show John McCain’s lead narrowing over time. Michael Scherer “forgot” that Pollster.com shows trendlines, unlike the inferior Real Clear Politics database. Either he’s a bad reporter and not checking all sources, or he’s just not being honest.
.
Also, the John McCain robocalls in Arizona were confirmed on WEDNESDAY. This post was proven to be incorrect TWO DAYS before it was posted!
.
I guess when you only trust “execrable” sources we should feel lucky that Michael Scherer is merely a slimeball.

I’m sorry. In the above I broke the link to Pollster.com.

Huh, not my fault, apparently…

Guess the ads going up in AZ are not important. The very liberal NPR only mentioned North Dakota and Georgia on its 2:00 top of the hour news.
.
/snark
.
Just irks me when I feel that they are flying under the radar with McCain support.

—off topic, perhaps
Have you noticed that John McCain, Sarah Palin and Mike Murphy have similar face structure – sort of square, heavy-set – a kind of T-Rex jaw that reminds one of “Jurassic Park”?
And did someone call Sarah ‘attractive’? It must have been John McCain.

ivb

no need for periods anymore

one advantage of this new shtty format

Hey Mikey: Drudge called and wants you to get off the tireswing for a few minutes, so he can get one more ride for posterity!

What a Hack.

Let the record show that Mark Halperin is a more astute ‘reporter’ than Michael Scherer:
http://thepage.time.com/2008/10/31/matts-last-gasp-not-really/

Remember Dear Lord, this atheist is ready to give up my profligate lifestyle(but not the weed) and begin a life of quiet reflection and worship of you, the Great God in the Sky, if you’ll only make Scherer one of the 600. Amen.

‘McCain’s advisers, for what it’s worth, say they aren’t worried about those states…Look, I mean they have a lot of money, and we don’t’

I guess a REAL reporter would ask if this was true why is McCain spending money on robo calls in AZ.

A candidate is ahead or nearly so in additional states, and Scherer thinks a decision to advertise in these states is a distraction. Evidently he believes these states’ electoral votes are somehow tainted or imaginary, or that they only count if other states vote a certain way.

Well, I would have been extremely disappointed if he’d dropped his bias this late in the game.

Wait, McCain fighting in states he’s clearly behind in such as PA, VA, NC, FL, IA, OH, is not a bright shiny object, but Obama fighting in states that he’s equally close in is a distraction?

Seriously, Scherer, you are a tool.

Look: Nevada is leaning over to Obama, NM is looking good, it makes sense to see what’s there in AZ. The Dakotas and Montana are close enough to make it worth a try. And you know that the GOP is going to cling to a map that shows big sparsely-populated red states this time next week.

This isn’t a Bush-goes-to-California moment. This is, in part, a recognition that the west was where Obama got his primary revved up, and he’s not going to treat those states like they’re chopped liver.

You know, after consideration, the problem with MS isn’t his POV. He has a guy he likes. 40%+ of the country agrees with him.
.
But his “Oh I’ve got all this figured out for you rubes” style of writing is,uh, off-putting.
.
I have to admit his loyalty to McCain, like his contempt for the readers here, has been unwavering. And that’s something.

Paul-no. I think you’ve finally hit it about Scherer. It’s like he thinks we can’t tell what he’s doing, he’s so far above it all. He’ll couch something negative for McCain as positive, but throw enough waffle-words and wiggle-room to pretend like he’s not doing that at all. What’s funny is how transparent he is. He doesn’t realize that his commenters (as a group) are much, much smarter than he is. And of course we are — we have dozens of brains working feverishly to his one (or thereabouts). And many of us are reading multiple sources (via blogs and blogs themselves), that I’m sure he’s not been keeping up with, since they aren’t — by and large — pro-McCain. And the right-wing blogs are mostly disinformation and propaganda.

You have still not corrected the plain error: there is no RCP average for ND and the spread you indicate is only for month old data – all current polling shows Obama up or a tie, including a new one today:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/31/155315/24/630/648218

Pourmecoffee… save your breath. Scherer *meant* to do what he did. He’s not gonna post a correction. He had access to the current polling data, just like all of us did. Just chose to post what the McCain campaign told him to use, that’s all.

Also today: CNN moves ND to tossup. Ace reporting!

Just because he’s winning other places too doesn’t refute the 50 state strategy.

Those attacks have been tried, and proved small minded.

missouri, new mexico, florida, pennsylvania: uh, oh for obama?
october 20, 2008: by tony_daysog, moderatedemocrats.com

Barak Obama is at grave risk of losing if rule-of-thumbs about modern presidential election are correct.

In projecting winners, pundits see Missouri and New Mexico as critical bell-weather states. Candidates who win at least one of these states win overall. Other pundits say winning candidates typically win two out of three races in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Meta-analysis of polling data indicates Obama will lose Missouri, New Mexico, and Florida. The Tom Bradley effect may be underway in Pennsylvania, suggesting that even as he exhibits a commanding lead Obama should critically evaluate polls from the Keystone State before drawing any conclusions.

MISSOURI: McCAIN: SOLID BASE OF SUPPORT

Obama comfortably leads McCain in the latest Missouri poll from Rasmussen, 52 to 46. Obama’s margin dwindles when numbers are averaged since September 22 – when Congress and the White House began tackling the financial crisis in earnest. Since then, Obama has posted 48.7 average to McCain’s 46.7.

But scratch beneath the surface of the polling data and something interesting emerges. The same data that shows Obama leading shows McCain’s base of support has hardened while Obama’s base remains somewhat tepid.

Statistically-speaking, a “hardened base” of support is expressed in terms of “standard deviation,” a rudimentary statistical tool measuring volatility around an average. Candidates want poll figures that are high and stable, i.e. not jumping up and down. Candidates without a hardened base are susceptible to losing voters who only tepidly support them, as well as undecideds who may be swayed to the other side.

McCain’s standard deviation is 1.9 for the period stretching from September 22 to now. In other words, McCain’s polls ranged between 44.8 and 48.6, all the while averaging 46.7. Obama’s standard deviation is 2.1, meaning since September 22 his polls ranged between 46.6 and 50.8, all the while averaging 48.7.

What distinguishes McCain is that the Arizonan’s standard deviation is below the threshold separating hard from soft support, or 2.0. We have found repeatedly that candidates with standard deviations below 2.0 that also decreased over time have come out winners, and this applies to candidates whose polling average is close enough to opponents they trail (see far below: Bush v. Kerry, New Mexico 2004). Candidates are not required to have standard deviations lower than 2.0 to win, but indications are that those exhibiting this trait have a greater likelihood of winning.

To be sure, Obama’s standard deviation at 2.1 is close to the threshold, so this race is competitive. But candidates’ respective standard deviations suggest McCain is less likely to lose voters while Obama is vulnerable. Data below come from Daviswissing.com, Real Clear Politics, and Pollster.com.

Missouri Prediction: John McCain.

POLLS DATE McCain Obama
Rasmussen Reports 10/15-15 46 52
CNN/Time/Opinion Research 10/11-14 49 48
Zogby 10/09-13 44 50
Rasmussen Reports 10/12-12 47 50
SurveyUSA 10/11-12 43 51
PPP 10/11-12 46 48
American Research Group 10/04-06 49 46
Rasmussen Reports 10/05-05 47 50
CNN/Time/ORh 09/28-30 48 49
SurveyUSA 09/23-24 48 46
Post-Dispatch/R2000 09/22-24 47 46
Research 2000 09/15-18 49 45
American Research Group 09/13-16 50 45
Rasmussen Reports 09/11-11 51 45
CNN/Time/OR 09/07-09 50 45
Rasmussen Reports 08/07-07 48 41

Long-Term Average 08/01-10/15 47.6 47.3
Short-Term Average 09/22-10/15 46.7 48.7

Long-Term Standard Dev 08/01-10/15 2.2 2.9
Short-Term Standard Dev 09/22-10/15 1.9 2.1

NEW MEXICO: REPEAT of BUSH-KERRY, 2004

Judging by the latest poll from Rasmussen and the poll average since September 22, Obama is blowing out McCain in New Mexico. But McCain’s low standard deviation of 1.8 for September 22-October 13 period means that he has a strong base of support, which hardened even more since the mid-August-to-October 13 period, when the volatility index was hovering at 2.4.

Obama volatility index is too high at 3.4, different but not much different than his long-term index of 3.7 That’s a red flag. Support for Obama is tepid — more so here than in Missouri — even if on average he’s polled higher than McCain.

We believe McCain will pull a GW Bush 2004: Bush trailed Kerry but had a tremendous low standard deviation, which decreased even more over time. In calling New Mexico for GW three weeks before the election, I argued that when support for a candidate is tepid (i.e. Kerry), in a competitive race between two candidates, undecideds and tepid supporters will switch to the SAFE candidate. In Bush, you had an incumbent; in McCain, you have a neighbor of Mew Mexico.

New Mexico Prediction: John McCain.

POLL DATES McCAIN OBAMA
Rasmussen 10/13-13 42 55
SurveyUSA 10/12-13 45 52
Zogby 10/09-13 44 51
Albuquerque Journal 09/29-02 40 45
Rasmussen 10/01-01 44 49
SurveyUSA 09/29-30 44 52
PPP (D) 09/17-19 42 53
American Research Group 09/14-16 44 51
Survey USA 09/14-16 44 52
Allstate/National Journal 09/11-15 42 49
Rasmussen Reports 09/08-08 49 47
CNN/Time/OR 08/24-26 40 53
Rasmussen Reports 08/20-20 41 47
Mason-Dixon 08/13-15 45 41

Long-Term Average 08/13-10/13 43.3 49.8
Short-Term Average 09/29-10/13 43.2 50.7

Long-Term Standard Dev 08/13-10/13 2.4 3.7
Short-Term Standard Dev 09/29-10/13 1.8 3.4

FLORIDA: McCAIN STRENGTHENS BASE, OBAMA HASN’T

McCain trails Obama when comparing poll averages for both candidates since September 22, 45.6 to 48.5. With the latest Survey USA poll having McCain in the lead at 49 to 47, there is a strong hint that McCain might be catching a wind beneath his wings. Combine this latest poll with, again, McCain’s low short-term and threshold-breaching standard deviation of 1.9 to Obama’s 2.7, there’s evidence that McCain has garnered a strong base and is positioned to cut into Obama’s tepid supporters, as well as sway undecideds.

Florida Prediction: leaning toward McCain.

POLL DATES McCain Obama
SurveyUSA 10/16-16 49 47
Research 2000 10/13-15 45 49
Hamilton 10/10-15 43 47
CNN/Time 10/11-14 46 51
InAdv/PollPosition 10/13-13 44 48
Datamar 10/12-13 42 47
Rasmussen Reports 10/12-12 46 51
Zogby 10/09-13 47 48
Florida Chamber (R) 09/30/01 45 42
Rasmussen Reports 10/08-08 47 50
Strategic Vision 10/06-08 44 52
FOX News/Rasmussen 10/05-05 45 52
Rasmussen Reports 10/05-05 45 52
Insider Advantage 09/30-30 46 49
CNN/Time/OR 09/28-30 47 51
Suffolk/WSVN 09/27-30 42 46
Quinnipiac 09/27-29 43 51
Rasmussen Reports 09/28-28 47 47
Survey USA 09/27-28 48 47
Public Policy Polling 09/27-28 46 49
American Research Group 09/23-25 46 47
Rasmussen Reports 09/24-24 48 47
Strategic Vision 09/20-22 48 45
Rasmussen Reports 09/21-21 51 46
Mason-Dixon 09/16-18 45 47
Research 2000 09/15-18 46 45
Survey USA 09/16-17 51 45
AMerican Research Group 09/14-17 46 46
SEA Polling 09/14-17 47 45
CNN/Time/OR 09/14-16 48 48
Allstate/National Journal 09/11-15 44 44
Rasmussen Reports 09/14-14 49 44
AMerican Research Group 09/14-14 46 46
Insider Advantage 09/10-10 50 42
Quinnipiac University 09/05-09 50 43
Rasmussen Reports 09/07-07 48 48
Public Policy Polling 09/06-07 50 45
Mason-Dixon 08/25-26 44 45
Strategic Vision 08/22-24 49 42
Quinnipiac University 08/17-24 47 43
Kitchens Group 08/18-21 42 39
American Research Group 08/18-20 47 46
Rasmussen Reports 08/18-18 46 43
Insider Advantage 08/11-11 48 44
Survey USA 08/01-03 50 44

Long-Term Average 46.6 46.4
Short-Term Average 45.6 48.5

Long-Term Standard Dev 2.4 3.1
Short-Term Standard Dev 1.9 2.7

PENNSYLVANIA: TOM BRADLEY EFFECT UNDERWAY? BUT WILL IT MATTER?

Imagine you are on Southwest Airlines. As the jet takes off and ascends toward 10,000 feet, you experience air turbulence. This is natural. At 10,000 feet, you can turn on your electronic items and begin to move about, for at this height there’s every expectation of smooth sailing. This pretty much describes Obama’s experience in Pennsylvania – where he’s scored at or above 50 in many polls – except in one regard. In the upper stratosphere, Obama is still experiencing turbulence.

While his short-term average hovers at a winning 51.2 – a decisive lead over McCain’s 40.9 average – curiously, Obama’s standard deviation is still relatively high at 2.9. Obama’s polling average is in the part of the stratosphere where one would expect smooth sailing.

That he’s experiencing turbulence suggests fickle support among the very same voters who oxymoronically put Obama consistently above 50 points. What’s happening? Voters in Pennsylvania are oscillating between Obama and “undecided,” not between Obama and McCain, and why this is happening **may** be related to the Tom Bradley effect. Our conjecture is that people for whom race is a consideration are **perhaps** telling pollsters they support Obama while in other polls they are changing their minds in **greater than expected** frequencies, resulting in Obama’s oscillation even as he hits at or above 50 points. It is worth noting that earlier Pennsylvania was perhaps one of the most racialized Democratic primary contests (Geraldine Ferraro’s comments, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, etc.), so to think that this dynamic has disappeared is a matter that is open to discussion.

By contrast, in another state where Obama is similarly beating McCain convincingly poll after poll — California — Obama has not only consistently scored above 50 (55 short-term average) but also managed to harden his base in scoring a below-threshold standard deviation of 1.4.

While the Tom Bradley effect **may** be underway in Pennsylvania, it remains to be seen if the magnitude of potential worst-case impacts for Obama is in the end enough to help McCain, who is substantially behind Obama. As it is, even McCain has exhibited a volatility index above the 2.0 threshold, meaning that Pennsylvania voters are also fickle toward him.

Pennsylvania prediction: TOSS-UP, but slightly leans Obama.

POLL Dates McCain Obama
Muhlenberg 10/15-19 41 53
Morning Call Tracking 10/13-17 39 52
Muhlenberg 10/10-14 38 52
Survey USA 10/11-13 40 55
Zogby 10/09-13 40 52
Morning Call Tracking 10/09-13 38 51
Muhlenberg 10/05-09 39 50
Marist 10/05-08 41 53
Strategic Vision (R) 10/05-07 40 54
Morning Call Tracking 10/03-07 38 50
Rasmussen 10/06-06 41 54
SurveyUSA 10/05-06 40 55
Muhlenberg 09/30-04 40 50
Quinnipiac University 09/27-29 39 54
Rasmussen Reports 09/28-28 42 50
Rasmussen Reports 09/24-24 45 49
Survey USA 09/23-24 44 50
American Research Group 09/20-22 46 50
Strategic Vision 09/20-22 46 47
Allstate/National Journal 09/18-22 41 43
Mason-Dixon 09/16-18 44 46
Univerity of Wisconsin 09/14-17 45 45
Marist College 09/11-15 44 49
Rasmussen Reports 09/14-14 47 47
Quinnipiac University 09/05-09 45 48
Rasmussen Reports 09/07-07 45 47
Strategic Vision 09/05-07 45 47
CNN/Time/OR 08/24-26 43 48
Quinnipiac University 08/17-24 42 49
Rasmussen Reports 08/19-19 40 45
Susquehanna Polling 08/11-14 41 46
Franklin&Marshall College 08/04-10 41 46

Long-Term Average 41.9 49.6
Short-Term Average 40.9 51.2

Long-Term Standard Dev 2.7 3.2
Short-Term Standard Dev 2.5 2.9

SUMMARY: OBAMA LEADS BUT HIGH STANDARD DEVIATION IS TROUBLING

In the key battleground states discussed above, Obama leads in many polls, on a latest or on an average poll basis. But he exhibits above-the-threshold standard deviations that are high enough to raise deep concerns. This continuing phenomenon is the mathematical equivalent of what many say about Obama’s campaign thus far, particularly on Barak’s inability to “seal the deal.”

To be sure, our analysis of other states shows that Obama will win Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio. In these states Obama’s standard deviation is well below the 2.0 threshold, and in comparing long- to short-term standard deviations, his volatility index actually declined, meaning he has a firm base of support, in addition to a commanding **and** growing average polls.

Our analysis also shows while Obama is close to winning Virginia (though his volatility index is higher than desired), McCain’s poll numbers place him in what we refer to as the “dead-zone”, i.e. high and increasing standard deviation, low and declining poll average.

Recommendations: Obama should hold one of his 30-minute television events this week, as soon as he comes back from Hawaii. He needs to deploy Bill and Hillary Clinton, both of whom drive media attention like no other. Above all: Obama needs to suck as much oxygen out of the room as soon as possible – NOW – to smother so to speak any possibility of McCain building on the solid base described above. That’s McCain’s m.o. after all: he’s the Republican come-back kid and, I believe, the stars are aligning to allow that narrative to roar back.

On a final note, Colorado will be the key, hotly, hotly contested race akin to Florida 2000 or Ohio 2004.

Fundamental premise of my analysis is this: winning presidential candidates are those who three weeks outside of election day have (1) garnered a firm base of support that (2) hardened even more over the course of the election season, and (3) improved their polling averages over time, regardless of whether they lead or trail in the latest polls on a spot or on a averaged basis. For purposes of analysis, a “firm base” means a standard deviation of 2.0 or less, while “hardened” support refers to a decrease below 2.0 in standard deviation over time. “Improved poll average” refers to comparison of long-term and short-term polling. Both averages start with a key event. In the case of the long-term average, it can be two to three weeks outside of election day back to Aug 1 when both parties held their respective conventions. This “long-term average” is then compared against a short-term average, which also has as its base point a key event, such as two to three weeks before election day back to September 22, the Monday of the week when Congress began solving the financial crisis. In short, presidential elections are already decided two to three weeks outside of election day. A polling average and its rudimentary statistical predicate — standard deviation — shed light as to trajectory of the outcome. To be sure, two to three weeks outside of election day, there will be this and that poll that, while purporting to show how **total** votes will be distributed, in reality only show **incremental** changes (particularly of those voters whose change from undecided to decided, decided to undecided, or from one candidates to another) that do not significantly alter the overall direction of an election, except in rare cases such as Wisconsin 2004. Recent polls for the most part confirm what I wrote above as early as October 20.

In short, it’ll be close — but I think (and hope) Obama will pull it off.

————————————-

Below are two examples from 2004 which show the importance of the 2.0 standard deviation threshold.

Bush v. Kerry: New Mexico, 2004: Winner: Bush

POLLS Bush Kerry
09/15 – 09/16: Alburquerque Journal 43 46
09/15 – 09/16: Mason-Dixon 47 43
09/13 – 09/16: ARG 44 49
08/27 – 09/01: Alburquerque Journal 45 42
8/17 – 08/19: ARG 42 49
07/06 – 07/08: ARG 42 49
03/30 – 04/01: ? 46 45

Long-Term AVG 44.1 46.1
Last Four AVG 44.8 45.0

Long-Term ST DEV 2.0 3.0
Last Four ST DEV 1.7 3.2

Bush v. Kerry: Pennsylvaniua, 2004: Winner: Kerry

POLLS Bush Kerry
10/04 – 10/06: ARG 46 48
10/03 – 10/05: Survey USA 47 49
10/01 – 10/04: Westchester Univ 43 50
09/25 – 10/01: Rasmussen 47 47
09/27 – 09/29: Strat Vision 48 45
09/27 – 09/28: Mason Dixon 44 45
09/25 – 09/28: CNN/USAT/Gallup 49 46
09/22 – 09/26: Quinnipiac 46 49
09/17 – 09/24: Philly Inquirer 47 49
09/21 – 09/22: FOX 45 48
09/14 – 09/15: Mason-Dixon 44 45
08/26 – 08/28: STRAT VISION 48 45
08/16 – 08/22: Strategic Vision 42 48
08/11 – 08/16: Quinnipiac 42 47
07/17 – 07/21: LATimes 38 48
05/22 – 05/23: Fox TV 46 41
05/21 – 05/22: Quinnipiac 43 44

Long-Term AVG 45.0 46.7
Last Four AVG 45.8 48.5

Long-Term ST DEV 2.8 2.3
Last Four ST DEV 1.9 1.3

McCain trying to talk bad polls into good ones for him – is spin

Obama spending in Arizona is about showing his confidence. people vote for winners.

not sure why that counts as spin.

perhaps you can elucidate in your next post

By Scherer’s tortured logic, McCain shouldn’t be campaigning in PA, OH, VA, NH, IA, etc.

Bear in mind:

1) Incremental effort to air already produced spots in these markets is close to zero

2) Obama has a real ground game in all of these states

3) A steady diet of spin from Davis, Schmidt and team is hazardous for rational thinking

Smart, concise, insightful. I consume 150+ political blog posts a day, and it’s rare that I actually feel smarter after reading one; this, however, did the trick.