Confessions of a political science junkie (me): I love the suspense of these last two weeks.

as a crime novel or a spectator sport. It is a life or death matter. We have to win.

I have been, and will continue to keep working to GOTV.

And the only known to date is NC which is showing

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/23/1148329/-NC-Early-Voting-Day-5-Young-Voters-Are-Psyched-Age-18-24-Turnout-Up-39-7



Democrats are up 70,000 over 2008.

Or, are you, as the loyal Democrat you surely must be , doing everything you can to make sure the polls' "overestimate (of) Dem turnout" does not prove the case?
Hum? Didn't catch your answer...

I've always figured out whodunit long before the last ten pages - as do most intelligent and observant people.

That is extremely unlikely.

If only because Agatha Christie wrote the same storyline three times with a different culprit each time.

(the motif of the stray bullet hitting the dinner gong)

If you had figured out whodunit long before the last ten pages, you'd have been wrong two times out of three.

But that was extremely likely.

You were trying to tell me you are 'intelligent and observant' because you can guess whodunit in crime novels.

But crime novels are written so as to allow different outcomes.

I suppose I can only congratulate you on being lucky

which is that intelligent and observant people can read between the lines - like your OP, for example - and discern exactly where the plot is meant to lead them.

I suppose I can only congratulate you on being far more transparent than you obviously think you are.

So, basically, you're telling us Obama is going to lose ... but doing it in the less trolly way possible, right?

For one, no the LV models are not overestimating Obama's support. Most aren't even based on the '08 numbers for that reason. If they were overestimating Obama's numbers, they'd be better, or equal, to his RV total. They're not. If anything, you could make the case they're underestimating Obama's turnout.

Yeesh.

In what language am I supposed to express myself to get my meaning across:

i.e. that today, Oct 24, it is close to impossible to be sure which of the two contenders will win.


I did not make any assumption on a difference between LVs and RVs.

I just mentioned that the Democrat electorate was extremely energized in '08, maybe slightly less so this year.

To put it differently, the Daily Kos reported a higher Republican engagement this year:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/21/1147769/-Gallup-s-LV-model-has-Non-Hispanic-white-vote-at-80

Lastly, is it allowed to ask honest questions and not be reflexively called a troll?

Thank you.

You say...

Overall RealClearPolitics = Romney +1%

Then...

BUT polls probably
• overestimate Dem turnout (based on '08 high figure), and
• underestimate Independents who usually lean challenger

So, you do the math. If the polls overestimate Dem turnout and independents who'll break for Romney ... doesn't that equal a loss?

Why did you skip what I wrote:

Face it, you're outlining an Obama loss. If the polls oversample Obama's support and undersample Romney support ... how does that work out to a victory? Just out yourself and admit you don't think Obama is going to win. If you do, then you've just thrown your own theory aside. Yeesh. It's not hard.

Amazing. Purely amazing.

I start my thread stating I do not know what will happen (whodunit, remember?)

Let me run the numbers with you. There are 130 toss up electoral votes.

Colorado (9)
Florida (29)
Iowa (6)
Michigan (16)
Nevada (6)
New Hampshire (4)
Ohio (18)
Pennsylvania (20)
Virginia (13)
Wisconsin (10)

VA polls lean Romney, maybe FLA because of Jeb Bush.
PA, NH and NV should go to Obama.

Which leaves you with battle states with Ohio being the most emblematic where polls give Obama two points ahead.

Against which you have the doubt on the Democratic turnout factored in the poll + the Romney momentum.

Both of which can't totally erase a two points lead.


Hence my original question: what are the arguments as of this minute for a win by either side?

And what could tilt things one way or the other within the next two weeks?

I am interested by the reasoning pro/con, not by witch hunting of purported intentions.

He could be at around 45-46% on election day and still easily win OH. Romney can't win without OH.

It is basically about polling; endless polling that always goes public. Interested parties make sure of that.

It is not a football game; but, the fatuous media, using polling data, is pumping it up as if it were.

WE all know that is not a football game or a crime novel.

I figured, in 2009, that whoever got elected in Nov 2008 was going to have a hard time getting re elected in Nov 2012.

I am not surprised that the election is close.

Agree with you here.

Rule of thumb: it's difficult to get reelected during hard times (see Left Aznar & Brown, or Right, Sarkozy)

Most people do not have the patience to analyze who caused what, they just change teams during hardship.

Exception to the rule: FDR.

FDR was the exception to the rule

For daring to post your love of politics. What a buncha tripe. People are maddening sometimes. I agree with you. I love politics. I like rooting for my guy (yes, Obama). Fucking rec for taking some enjoyment outta life.

Obama has always led, from day one, when you look at electoral college votes.

Obama will get at least 271. He could go as high as 300+.

Sorry to ruin the surprise for you.

Not now, hence the present thread.

Yeah, Michigan and Pennsylvania are toss ups, and Oregon is only leaning Obama.

Gimme a fucking break.

Let me tell you something. WI, MI, PA, IA and NV are not toss-ups. And, this will really blow your mind, Obama has already won Ohio! Holy shit.

That is the dumbest, most out of touch map I have seen. I don't know where you got it, nor do I care. It does not reflect reality.

And Obama wins. Your post is a farce.

....of 538 and the Princeton Election Consortium?

That fact you are posting RCP's map tells me you are a rank amateur at this. I mean, the idea Michigan is a "toss-up", but NC leans Romney is laughable.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

http://election.princeton.edu/

I agree with your remark "Michigan and Pennsylvania are toss ups, and Oregon is only leaning Obama."

But disagree about dismissing the RCP map so fast.

Yes, I do read Nate Silver's 538 daily (reading the IHT helps), but the point of posting the RCP map was about change.

Before the first debate, RCP's electoral college was much more in favor of Obama, not tied like now.

Anyway, here's the best summary I found to date:

....that doesn't give states that are CLEARLY in the Obama column to him, but leans a state that is absolutely a toss up right now to Rmoney???

Seriously.

one can legitimize a map that shows Iran as a land-locked country that borders Syria.

I already granted you the failing of the RCP map which I had used to illustrate the change during October.

Anyway, you prefer FiveThirtyEight. Here is last Nate Silver's comment still illustrating a close race:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

But by god, how can anyone honestly sit there and ignore states that are clearly in one sides favor as toss ups, and put leans in the other camp's ledger when they are closer than the supposed toss-ups? It's like the sports guy coming on and breathlessly telling you Pittsburgh has scored 31 points and not mentioning that Miami has 35.

I repeat for the third time, I agree about the inconsistencies in the RCP labeling of states as toss-up or not.

There might be Republicans lurking there.

Thanks for your in-depth analysis of my initial question.

perhaps you should know about TPM's Polltracker, a non-rightwing source.

TPM is currently down

http://core.talkingpointsmemo.com/election/scoreboard

The fact that the latest RCP map and FiveThirtyEight map are extremely close should put your worry to rest.

Last Ohio polls narrowed to a tie. Article concludes to a narrow race.


http://www.ohio.com/news/local-news/presidential-race-tied-in-ohio-newspaper-poll-1.345675