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

[derspiess]

I don't keep track of such stuff on my own, but my impression was that this wasn't the case.

538 posted an article yesterday that actually said the opposite for Gallup in that it wasn't good at predicting election results.

Actually DG posted that article last night

Anyway, Gallup is better in some years than others:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/9442/election-polls-accuracy-record-presidential-elections.aspx

[garbon]

I don't keep track of such stuff on my own, but my impression was that this wasn't the case.

538 posted an article yesterday that actually said the opposite for Gallup in that it wasn't good at predicting election results.

Actually DG posted that article last night

Anyway, Gallup is better in some years than others:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/9442/election-polls-accuracy-record-presidential-elections.aspx

Oh it is odd then that he forgot it...?

[DGuller]

I didn't completely forget it.  I recalled Nate Silver describing in that article how Gallup has a history of bouncing around wildly and missing the mark, but I skimmed through that portion the first time, and didn't bother going back to get the details.  That's why I hedged so much in making that statement.  On top of that, I generally dislike quoting details from other people's blogs, because you're just regurgitating what may be selectively chosen data.

[Habbaku]

   You posted an article you didn't read?

[katmai]

What Tim is only one allowed to do that?

[The Brain]

Posting an article you've read is like wiping before taking a dump.

[Viking]

What Tim is only one allowed to do that?

He paid a high social and emotionial cost for that right, yes, only Tim as the right to do that.

[garbon]

What Tim is only one allowed to do that?

Because 1 Tim is enough.

[DGuller]

  You posted an article you didn't read?

Where did I say that?

[Eddie Teach]

What Tim is only one allowed to do that?

Because 1 Tim is enough.

Tell that to BB.

[Phillip V]

With little more than 2 weeks left, let's look at the RCP map with no toss-ups, ie the state is given to the candidate with a lead using the average of state polls.

Even if we give Romney the benefit of the doubt that the heretofore momentum putting him barely ahead in some swing states will continue, he still needs to win over states that Obama keeps a narrow, but stubborn lead in: Ohio, Iowa, and Nevada.

Even with the first post-debate surge, only a few polls in Ohio had Romney leading with maybe +1. Most still show Obama ahead by a few points (+2.5). Within striking distance, but Ohio is a big state and there is little time left.

Alternatively, Romney can win by snagging Nevada and Iowa. However, there has never been any poll in Nevada this year showing a Romney lead. Iowa polling is mixed, but Obama still averages a 2.4-point lead.

[Eddie Teach]

So boring how we keep getting that same map election cycle after election cycle with very minor adjustments.

[Phillip V]

SURPRISE: Romney could lose all three states I mention above and still win the election by turning Wisconsin red. Obama only has a 2.8-point lead there, but I am still skeptical that it is a toss-up state.

[ulmont]

So boring how we keep getting that same map election cycle after election cycle with very minor adjustments.

It's almost like there's a legitimate urban-rural divide in our society.

[garbon]

So boring how we keep getting that same map election cycle after election cycle with very minor adjustments.

It's almost like there's a legitimate urban-rural divide in our society.

Wouldn't explain Vermont or Maine.