POTUS Debate II: The Empire Strikes Back at the Wrath of Electric Mittensaloo

[mongers]

I have a lot of silver teaspoons, old family hand me downs, I use for all sorts of things; a mate of mine notice this the other day and was was like "woah, these spoons are made of silver", they must be worth all of $2-3 each by weight of metal.   

Sounds like you have some intelligent mates.

I checked the hallmarks and apparently they were made during the Napoleonic wars, no real value, but nice that I'm routinely using something about 200 years old.

[derspiess]

Can you explain to us how Gallup is crap?  Be specific.

The volatility is a big indicator.  Just a month ago it showed the biggest bump for Obama, and now it's showing the biggest bump for Romney.  If the poll with that many people in the sample size appears to be so volatile, then it's an indication that it's just badly designed.  It also has the biggest house effect as calculated by 538, which by itself doesn't mean much as long as it's a consistent bias, but in practice a rifle that appears to shoot way off target is also a rifle that shoots unpredictably off target.

You do realize they switched from registered to likely voters a couple weeks ago, right?  Registered skewed toward Obama while Likely (which is more relevant this close to the election) favors Romney.

[DGuller]

You do realize they switched from registered to likely voters a couple weeks ago, right?  Registered skewed toward Obama while Likely (which is more relevant this close to the election) favors Romney.

No, I did not.  However, the difference is only supposed to be about 1.5 points, so it can't explain such a wild swing.  If switching causes that much difference, then it's just a further indication that the sampling or the processing of the sample is off.

[garbon]

I have a lot of silver teaspoons, old family hand me downs, I use for all sorts of things; a mate of mine notice this the other day and was was like "woah, these spoons are made of silver", they must be worth all of $2-3 each by weight of metal.   

Sounds like you have some intelligent mates.

I checked the hallmarks and apparently they were made during the Napoleonic wars, no real value, but nice that I'm routinely using something about 200 years old.

I was looking at "woah, these spoons are made of silver".

[Phillip V]

Romney is pulling staff out of North Carolina as RealClearPolitics colors the state pink: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

Associated Press now says that Romney is considering shifting resources to Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/on-women-taxes-hispanics-romney-primary-message-shifts-as-election-day-nears/2012/10/17/ebfb2bae-18ba-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.html

Susquehanna Polling just published a new poll showing Romney with a 4-point lead in Pennsylvania: http://washingtonexaminer.com/poll-shows-romney-leading-in-blue-pennsylvania/article/2511153#.UIB508XMiSo

[derspiess]

Haven't watched Obama's yet but Mitt's speech at the Al Smith dinner had a couple zingers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QsSzkCgcBtU#!

[DGuller]

Nate Silver weighs in on the Gallup crap: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/gallup-vs-the-world/#more-36284.  He pretty much says that I said, but backs it up with much more evidence.  My monetary offer still stands to those who believe that Gallup isn't full of shit.

[derspiess]

Nate Silver weighs in on the Gallup crap: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/gallup-vs-the-world/#more-36284.  He pretty much says that I said, but backs it up with much more evidence.  My monetary offer still stands to those who believe that Gallup isn't full of shit.

I zoned out about halfway through.  Will give it another go after I've had my coffee in the morning.  I'm sure Mr. Silver makes some solid points.  But be honest:  isn't part of your anti-Gallup rage due to the simple fact that you hate the idea of Romney winning?

[Kleves]

Obama and Romney each had some good lines tonight:

President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took a break from their often rancorous campaigns to poke fun at each other and themselves at the annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner in New York, Thursday night.

Romney told the formal white tie and gown crowd that, "it's nice to finally relax and wear what Anne and I wear around the house."

Through much of the evening, the two candidates sat just one chair down from each other. Only host Cardinal Timothy Dolan separated them, the Associated Press reported.

Romney told the crowd, "I was actually hoping the president would bring Joe Biden along this evening, because he'll laugh at anything."

In discussing how he prepares for the debates, Romney said his strategy was to "find the biggest available straw man and mercilessly attack it; Big Bird didn't even see it coming."

Romney playfully jabbed at Obama, saying both candidates rely on crucial people. As Romney put it, "I have my beautiful wife, Ann; he's got Bill Clinton."

After his introduction, Obama asked the crowd to "please take your seats, otherwise Clint Eastwood will yell at them."

Obama talked about his performance in Tuesday night's debate, saying he "felt really well rested after the nice long nap I had in the first debate."

He added, "I particularly want to apologize to (MSNBC's) Chris Matthews. Four years ago I gave him a thrill up his leg; this time around I gave him a stroke."

Poking fun at his opponent, Obama talked about being attacked after his overseas trip in 2008 for being "a celebrity because I was so popular with our allies overseas. And I have to say I'm impressed with how Governor Romney has avoided that problem."

The Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner is an annual fundraiser for the charity named after the former governor of New York. The dinner has become a regular stop for presidential candidates dating back to 1960, according to the foundation's Web page.

[DGuller]

Nate Silver weighs in on the Gallup crap: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/gallup-vs-the-world/#more-36284.  He pretty much says that I said, but backs it up with much more evidence.  My monetary offer still stands to those who believe that Gallup isn't full of shit.

I zoned out about halfway through.  Will give it another go after I've had my coffee in the morning.  I'm sure Mr. Silver makes some solid points.  But be honest:  isn't part of your anti-Gallup rage due to the simple fact that you hate the idea of Romney winning?

No.  I'm a much more passionate statistician than I am a Democrat.  People misusing numbers is about the biggest pet peeve I have.  And let's turn it around:  aren't you defending Gallup because it tells you what you want to hear (at least until it shows a 15 point lead for Obama next week)?

[DGuller]

Romney is pulling staff out of North Carolina as RealClearPolitics colors the state pink: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html

Associated Press now says that Romney is considering shifting resources to Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/on-women-taxes-hispanics-romney-primary-message-shifts-as-election-day-nears/2012/10/17/ebfb2bae-18ba-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.html

Susquehanna Polling just published a new poll showing Romney with a 4-point lead in Pennsylvania: http://washingtonexaminer.com/poll-shows-romney-leading-in-blue-pennsylvania/article/2511153#.UIB508XMiSo

More examples of cherrypicking.  Cite a poll a that shows a 4 point lead for Romney, but ignore the fact that even a dumb RCP average shows a 5 point lead for Obama in Pennsylvania. 

If someone posted a poll that shows an implausible Obama surge, I'd call bullshit just the same.  However, no one on the Democratic side here is silly enough to cherrypick polls when in this day and age there are dozens of them.  That ironically results in looking like I'm cherrypicking in my own criticism of polls.

[derspiess]

And let's turn it around:  aren't you defending Gallup because it tells you what you want to hear (at least until it shows a 15 point lead for Obama next week)?

Fair question.  But go back through my posts and you'll find that months ago I mentioned Gallup as one of the two main polls I follow.  That was back when Gallup had Obama ahead. 

It's not as if I'm watching only Gallup and ignoring all the other polls.  But I do happen to think that Mitt's lead in Gallup indicates that he has a good shot at this point of winning the popular vote.  And as I keep saying, my prediction is that Mitt wins popular and your guy wins the EC.

So stop acting like I'm some delusional Mitt fanboy.  I'm a lot more objective than you think.

[DGuller]

And let's turn it around:  aren't you defending Gallup because it tells you what you want to hear (at least until it shows a 15 point lead for Obama next week)?

Fair question.  But go back through my posts and you'll find that months ago I mentioned Gallup as one of the two main polls I follow.  That was back when Gallup had Obama ahead. 

It's not as if I'm watching only Gallup and ignoring all the other polls.  But I do happen to think that Mitt's lead in Gallup indicates that he has a good shot at this point of winning the popular vote.  And as I keep saying, my prediction is that Mitt wins popular and your guy wins the EC.

So stop acting like I'm some delusional Mitt fanboy.  I'm a lot more objective than you think.

Ok, I guess you're just guilty of suboptimal choice in polls to follow.  In this day and age, following individual tracking polls is fraught with danger.  Even an RCP average, as unsophisticated as it is, is still a better choice than any one individual tracking poll.  This election is going to have a margin of victory of at most 3 percentage points;  that way too thin for even a well-designed single poll (which tracking polls are generally not).

[derspiess]

More examples of cherrypicking.  Cite a poll a that shows a 4 point lead for Romney, but ignore the fact that even a dumb RCP average shows a 5 point lead for Obama in Pennsylvania. 

You can call that cherrypicking if you want, but if it's the most recent poll for that state (particularly if it's been a while since there was a 'fresh' one), I think it's relevant and worth mentioning.  It could be indicative of a trend, or just an outlier.  But it's still newsworthy IMO.

[DGuller]

More examples of cherrypicking.  Cite a poll a that shows a 4 point lead for Romney, but ignore the fact that even a dumb RCP average shows a 5 point lead for Obama in Pennsylvania. 

You can call that cherrypicking if you want, but if it's the most recent poll for that state (particularly if it's been a while since there was a 'fresh' one), I think it's relevant and worth mentioning.  It could be indicative of a trend, or just an outlier.  But it's still newsworthy IMO.

Even taking that statistical reasoning at face value (with great reservation, as you may guess), it's still noteworthy only in context, which Philip as always failed to provide.