Blog Archives

It’s the beginning of the most important day of the year…

Waking up to Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire:

Nate Silver now projects President Obama’s margin of victory to be two or three percentage points in the popular vote, approximating the margin that George W. Bush achieved in defeating John Kerry in 2004.

In addition, he gives Obama a 91.6% chance to win the necessary 270 electoral votes for re-election.

John Avlon: “The final polls are out and behind the national horserace is a fascinating dynamic — Mitt Romney is narrowly winning independent voters while President Obama is winning centrist voters by a nearly 20-point margin.”

“This is significant because in past elections independents and centrist voters have been largely synonymous-overlapping cohorts, reflecting the belief of many independents that the two parties are too polarized and disproportionately dominated by their respective special interests. But what I think we’re seeing this year is the extended impact of the tea party – a growth in the number of independent conservatives that has moved the overall independent voting block slightly to the right. In turn, centrist voters are more likely to vote for Obama precisely because of the polarizing impact of the tea party and the intransigence of many conservative congressmen when it came to working in a good faith spirit of principled compromise with the Obama administration.”

OK… I’m off for my morning appointments (gee…how do people get up this early?).  – Bill

 

Advertisements

I might have limited posting for a while…

Due to a medical emergency (the discovery of a potential brain tumor… aint that a kick in the head?) I’m going to be going in for several days of testing, etc., but I’ll try to keep up with you folks. I want you to know how much I appreciate the readers of Under The LobsterScope, and your e-mail to me is always welcome, as well as your likes and comments.

DON’T FORGET TO VOTE THIS MORNING IF YOU HAVEN’T ALREADY.

I don’t want to wake up in a hospital and find that Mitt the Twit is president.

English: Nate Silver in Washington, D.C.

 Nate Silver

I’m glad that Nate Silver in the NY Times, 538 column, is still got his usually very accurate poll predictions on Obama carrying most of the swing states… and his prediction that our president will be re-elected.

Your e-mail is always appreciated… Bill.

So what is the chance of Obama winning right now?

Bob Cesca published Nate Silver‘s graphic projecting the election winner which appeared in the NY Times. I’d like to reproduce it as well since it seems to show the start of a legitimate bounce for Obama after the last debate.

Here is Nate Silver’s most recent projection:

Monday’s debate (the last one) may give another push to Obama if he pulls of a victory as he did in the second round. And remember, the election is only 18 days away. Focus on both campaigns will become very tight in the next few days.

The Conventions are Over… where do the candidates stand now?

Nate Silver made some reasonable observations in the New York Times. Here are his predictions as of today:

How this will change over the next two months is the question.

The state by state probabilities as of today are certainly in Obama‘s favor:

Needless to say, the heavy vote states are right there in Obama’s pocket. Let’s see it it lasts.

Howard Fineman is predicting a BIG loss for Democrats.

This article from HuffPo gives you Fineman‘s views this morning… I’ll give you the first couple of paragraphs, but DO go in and read the rest:
clipped from www.huffingtonpost.com
Publicly, Democratic campaign officials are putting a brave face on predictions of House losses, with House Campaign Chairman Chris Van Hollen claiming that the party might hold the chamber, meaning that they would lose fewer than a net of 39 seats. Other officials are pegging the expected losses at 50-55 seats, in line with consensus independent public forecasts, such as those of Charlie Cook and Nate Silver.

But within the last 12 hours I’ve spoken to two top Democratic consultants — very active on the battlefield this fall and with 60 years of on-the-ground experience between them — who told me some shocking news.

Separately, and privately, they each told me that they thought the Democrats could lose 70 seats on Tuesday. That would be a blowout of historic proportions.

For the record, the biggest one-day loss for the president’s party in modern times was in 1938, when voters expressed their impatience with the Depression and FDR’s New Deal by voting out 71 Democrats.

blog it

Me? I see it the way Tony Auth does:

We are about to enter an era of lunacy.

Here’s a great long post by Doctor Cleveland:

Here’s the first couple of paragraphs:

History Never Repeats Itself

by Doctor Cleveland

Election day is next Tuesday. Papers like the New York Times and Washington Post began publishing their post-mortem analyses of the election results last week. What should Obama do now that next Tuesday’s results are in? Highly paid opinion writers have opinions.

The current conventional wisdom has two basic pillars:

1) It is currently 1994.

2) Since it’s 1994, Bill Clinton should be President.

I’m going to leave the actual electoral predictions to my colleague Articleman and to folks like Nate Silver. But even if Tuesday night were to turn into an exact replay of 1994, district by district, the political situation on Wednesday morning would still be something completely new. History echoes itself, but it never repeats exactly. If this really were 1994, of course, being more like Bill Clinton would be a stupid idea, like telling someone fighting Muhammad Ali to be more like Sonny Liston. As Ezra Klein and Josh Marshall both remind us, the Big Dog was soundly beaten in 1994. And his post-1994 playbook, no matter how successful it was fifteen years ago, is just not going to work in 2011. Things have changed.

Now go to DAGBLOG to read the rest.

What happens if “No One” gets elected in Nevada…

clipped from politicalwire.com

For more than three decades, Nevada voters have had the choice of choosing “None of These Candidates” when they enter the voting booth. With a new Mason-Dixon poll showing Nevadans very unhappy with their choices in the U.S. Senate race, the ballot line might actually help determine the victor.

Nate Silver thinks Sen. Harry Reid (D) may “be hoping to get an assist from the ballot option this year, which is unique among the 50 states. Indeed, there are those who think his entire campaign may be predicated upon it. Mr. Reid’s job approval numbers, hovering around 40 percent in most polls, would ordinarily prevent a candidate from being re-elected. But his opponent Sharron Angle, whom Mr. Reid’s campaign has tagged for her ‘extreme and dangerous’ views, might not be elected under ordinary circumstances either.”
Major caveat: “None of These Candidates” cannot actually win the
election. If it were to win a plurality, the election would default to
the second-place candidate.
blog it
So…. Harry Reid could “lose” and still “win”?