But seriously, Nate Silver pulls up an interesting point today: looking back at the last several presidential elections, if you simply average state polls in the last two weeks before the election, you'll notice that, even if they hadn't gotten the margins correct, they still correctly predicted the winner in each state, with extremely few exceptions.
So unless there was across the board bias from badly designed sampling, Obama should win; Silver now gives Obama an 85.1% chance of winning -- the highest since the day of the first Presidential Debate.
Likewise, IEM (71.0 %), Betfair (77.2%) and inTrade (64.6%) all have high odds for Obama.
And now, RCP shows Obama with a lead in the national polls, in aggregate. Significantly, the latest poll in their aggregation, the Pew Research Center Poll, shows Obama with a lead (+3%) that is wider than their MoE (2.2%). Importantly, the newest Pew number is a 3% (higher than the MoE) gain from the previous week's, and a 7% difference from 31 days ago.
Worth noting from last week Ezra Klein's Wonkblog, a post from Dylan Matthews pointing out research that shows that asking people who they think will win, is more accurate than asking them who they're voting for. Referring to the last Gallup poll (which showed Romney with a big national lead (+5%), most people (54%) expected Obama to win, compared to (34%) Romney. This is a near-mirror reflection of Pew's numbers (52% to 30%, Obama expected to win).
Finally, back to the future we go! I'm still standing (near) by my prediction on August 2:
- Obama 328 Romney 210 -- electoral college
- Obama 51.5% Romney 46.5% -- national popular vote
While it won't be the 328 I predicted, I still think it'll be over 300 electoral votes for Obama, and that he'll pull in over 50% of the popular vote.
Okay, one last thing: Now American Crossroads (Karl Rove) has joined Restore Our Future superPAC in spending ad money in Oregon. With 40.6% of all ballots turned in (as of Nov. 1), this could officially be called the Panic Strategy.
If Karl Rove's own electoral college map shows that Oregon's 7 electoral votes require overcoming a 7% disadvantage, then there must be something that has them terribly scared of Mitt's chances. You see, there are 9 other states that have smaller gaps to close than Oregon and 6 of them have more electoral votes than Oregon. It is a sign that they might be conceding a loss in both Iowa and Ohio, and now must make a play for Pennsylvania and Oregon to replace those two losses.
If Karl Rove's own electoral college map shows that Oregon's 7 electoral votes require overcoming a 7% disadvantage, then there must be something that has them terribly scared of Mitt's chances. You see, there are 9 other states that have smaller gaps to close than Oregon and 6 of them have more electoral votes than Oregon. It is a sign that they might be conceding a loss in both Iowa and Ohio, and now must make a play for Pennsylvania and Oregon to replace those two losses.
No comments:
Post a Comment