Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Elephant Watcher Makes Small Recalculations

1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 6:42:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Recently Elephant Watcher made changes in its calculations. It was rather a small one. Before the recalculations Romney was leading with 65% vs. Obama's 35% to win the presidency. The new calculations now have Romney still leading but with 62% vs. Obama's 38%.

As of now there has been a change in their polls. Usually Elephant Watcher only picks the best polls rather than Real Clear Politics which picks all. Romney led EW's poll average, but now Obama has a slight lead with an average of 0.1%.

Furthermore, as we all know Romney's work at Bain Capital is a main attacking point in Obama's campaign. However, while Elephant Watcher saw the Bain attacks as OK, they felt that it would be wise for Obama to not overdo them. He did a few months ago when Cory Booker and Bill Clinton disagreed with the Bain attack ads. After that there was a break, but now they have returned.

The new attacks are in a more complicated form. The new attacks turned out to be part clever, part foolish, and partially accelerated by an unforced error on Romney's part. Obama's new angle of attack focuses on when precisely Romney "left" Bain. The basic facts are not in dispute; independent fact-checkers and Bain leaders present at the time (including some current Obama supporters) all confirm Romney's timeline: In early 1999, Romney stopped working at Bain and started working full-time to organize the 2002 Olympics. Although Romney's responsibilities at Bain were transferred to other managers, Romney maintained his ownership of the company for a few more years--including the title of CEO. Thus, while Romney was no longer physically present or making managerial decisions, his name continued to appear on SEC filings for the company.

On its own, this timeline has little relevance to anything--and that is where the "clever" portion of the Obama campaign's attacks comes in. Romney's political opponents have always attacked Bain by focusing on Bain's failures, and Romney defended himself by pointing to its greater successes. But Romney has also occasionally defended himself by absolving himself from any bad decisions made by Bain after his departure in early 1999. Now, the Obama campaign points out that Romney was still owner and CEO of the company, and was thus responsible for everything that occurred there.

It is difficult for voters to relate to the idea that someone owns a company but is no longer present. As Obama pointed out, voters think that an owner-CEO must still be responsible for the decisions made by the company. When Romney says he "left" Bain in early 1999, voters expect a more complete break.

The "foolish" part of Obama's attacks came in the form of an overreach: They suggested that if Romney was not the owner and CEO of the company as reported in SEC filings, it would be a felony to falsely report such. No one, including Romney himself, ever disputed that he held onto his ownership interest in Bain for a few years after he went to work for the Olympics in early 1999. Therefore, no one actually believes Romney committed a felony. The charge is extreme to the point of absurdity, and were the Romney campaign ever to suggest that Obama is a felon, they would undoubtedly be accused of racism.

If the Romney campaign released a cogent, convincing written statement explaining this, perhaps the new Bain attacks would have fizzled as well. This is where the "unforced error" portion comes into play. With the facts on their side, the Romney campaign sensed that Obama overreached. They probably felt it was important to hit back hard to show that they are tough--and Romney himself was probably quite offended by the accusations made against him. On Friday, Romney responded by participating in as many TV news interviews as he could, to address the situation.

By jumping directly into the fray, Romney made the new Bain attacks even more prominent in the media than they were before. Since he had not previously participated in many interviews this campaign season, he also appeared to endorse the idea that the timing of his Bain departure is important in some way. The forum was also wrong: By participating in interviews with Obama-supporting journalists, rather than releasing a written statement (or simply appearing for a public statement), he allowed the dynamic to shift: Instead of Romney attacking Obama for his overreach, he allowed the journalists to put him on the defensive as they cross-examined him about Bain.

While the Bain timeline is occasionally used by Romney as a defense to bad Bain decisions made after early 1999, Romney's primary interest in defending the timeline is that it's the truth. However, in the context of Obama's attacks, defending the timeline appears to observers as a way to disassociate himself from Bain. That reinforces Obama's premise that Bain is a weakness rather than an asset. In the past, Romney would defend Bain with a counter-punch focusing on Bain's successes. Defense of a timeline can't involve such a counter-punch; instead, it can only involve the facts about Romney leaving a company but still owning it and having the title of CEO. Again, these are facts to which voters will have great difficulty relating.

Given the lack of controversy about the facts surrounding Romney's timeline, Obama's attacks had little substance. Obama erred by overreaching, but Romney played into Obama's hand through the unforced error of lending weight to the attacks' importance. This may be considered the first time Romney's campaign has made a serious blunder during the general election campaign.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 6:43:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
-.-

Not trying to be mean.....but no one cares.......at all.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Obama will win :(

Get over it.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 7:42:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

http://s-seriesforum.com...

Thank you. You know it.

Furthermore, "elephant watcher" sounds pretty biased, just by their name.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 7:57:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 7:42:01 PM, Contra wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

http://s-seriesforum.com...

Thank you. You know it.

Furthermore, "elephant watcher" sounds pretty biased, just by their name.

Elephaunt watcher? Sound completely bi-partisan contra!!
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 10:16:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 7:42:01 PM, Contra wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

http://s-seriesforum.com...

Thank you. You know it.

Furthermore, "elephant watcher" sounds pretty biased, just by their name.

Evidence that it is biased? Furthermore, I already explained that it got its name from the 2008 Republican race for nomination when it predicted that race. It was so popular that it continued to the 2008 presidential race and the 2012 GOP race for nomination. It continued 2012 election. It sucessfully predictted the previous three races. How is that for yah?
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 10:32:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
http://www.intrade.com...

If you believe them, you should wage money here. Your odds would be better than the stock market.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2012 11:51:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

Intrade forecasts
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:18:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:10:03 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Ron Paul, fvck you big government shills for corporations.
http://www.naturalnews.com...

I stopped following politics, is he still in? If he is I like him, economically at least...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:22:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:18:28 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:10:03 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Ron Paul, fvck you big government shills for corporations.
http://www.naturalnews.com...

I stopped following politics, is he still in? If he is I like him, economically at least...

Yeah, but he wouldn't kill as many brown children overseas or deprive people of their basic rights. Life's all about tradeoffs.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:26:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:22:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:18:28 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:10:03 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Ron Paul, fvck you big government shills for corporations.
http://www.naturalnews.com...

I stopped following politics, is he still in? If he is I like him, economically at least...

Yeah, but he wouldn't kill as many brown children overseas or deprive people of their basic rights. Life's all about tradeoffs.

Well i can't vote for a man who won't kill brown people. This is America after all.
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:47:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:26:12 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:22:52 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:18:28 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:10:03 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Ron Paul, fvck you big government shills for corporations.
http://www.naturalnews.com...

I stopped following politics, is he still in? If he is I like him, economically at least...

Yeah, but he wouldn't kill as many brown children overseas or deprive people of their basic rights. Life's all about tradeoffs.

Well i can't vote for a man who won't kill brown people. This is America after all.

And they say patriotism is dead! Ha!
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 9:25:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 11:51:36 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

Intrade forecasts

In trade forecasted Obamacare repeal at 75%.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 9:42:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 9:25:30 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 11:51:36 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

Intrade forecasts

In trade forecasted Obamacare repeal at 75%.

Ok. Incumbent advantage.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 10:25:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 9:42:39 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 9:25:30 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 11:51:36 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

Intrade forecasts

In trade forecasted Obamacare repeal at 75%.


Ok. Incumbent advantage.

If you are basing the fact that he will win ON the incumbent advantage, then I really have nothing to say to your superior reasoning and intellect.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:30:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Guys, Elephant Watcher is always right. That is a fact there is no way anyone can defeat it.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:43:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 10:25:02 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/15/2012 9:42:39 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 9:25:30 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 11:51:36 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

Intrade forecasts

In trade forecasted Obamacare repeal at 75%.


Ok. Incumbent advantage.

If you are basing the fact that he will win ON the incumbent advantage, then I really have nothing to say to your superior reasoning and intellect.

Although he will likely win, I really don't think Romney can win. He can't win over/excite his base, Obama does have the incumbant advantage, and Obama to the average person is much more like able. So romneys screwed.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:46:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 11:30:16 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Guys, Elephant Watcher is always right. That is a fact there is no way anyone can defeat it.

Other then the fact they change poll data they're totally accurate
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:51:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I follow the RCP average:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Of the ten pollsters in their average, only 1 has Romney winning (and that too by 1%).

Average is Obama up by 2.3%.
Sapere Aude!
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:53:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 11:46:37 AM, 16kadams wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:30:16 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Guys, Elephant Watcher is always right. That is a fact there is no way anyone can defeat it.

Other then the fact they change poll data they're totally accurate

They explained why the polls are like that in one of their polls:

As part of Elephant Watcher's shift from the Republican primary to the general election, we have added a page devoted to national match-up polls between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. The Polls page will be updated frequently, adding national polls as they are released, and averaging the most recent of them. Though polling data during the Republican primary was occasionally sparse, there will always be plenty of polls released on the 2012 presidential election. The trick is in reviewing all of this data in the most intelligent manner possible. In today's post, we will explain how Elephant Watcher will present the polling data during this election season, as well as the reasons behind it.

The Polls page will only include national polls. This is in contrast to many political analysts, who spend their time on examining the polls from swing states. Since the 2000 election, an increasing amount of attention has been paid to state polls, rather than national--because the winner of a presidential election is determined by the electoral college. Earlier, we offered an in-depth explanation of why it's much better to follow national polls rather than state polls. To summarize, state poll analysts are forced to rely on less accurate polling, fewer polls, out-of-date polls, less-reputable pollsters, and must cobble together electoral map projections from multiple, interdependent state outcomes. National polls bypass each of these problems. Unless the election is decided by less than 1% nationally, the winner of the popular vote is virtually guaranteed to win the electoral college anyway.

Having decided to track national rather than state polls, there are still a few things to consider. Some polls are listed as polls of "likely voters," while others are "registered voters" or "adults." Polls of likely voters involve what are called "likely voter screens," which adjust the polls based on which participants are most likely to vote in November. To do this, pollsters ask participants whether they intend to vote, but also ask other questions to determine whether they are likely to turn out (e.g. past voting history, voter enthusiasm, etc.). Polls of registered voters do not.

The difference matters. In presidential elections, Republican voters consistently turn out to vote at a higher rate than their Democratic counterparts. This means that registered voter polls will consistently overestimate the strength of the Democratic candidate. This is not an expected or potential bias--it is a known bias. By the time the election is imminent, nearly all pollsters will switch to polling likely voters rather than registered voters in order to eliminate the bias and increase accuracy.

Early on in the election season, however, many pollsters will not yet employ the likely voter screens. Why not? Because the closer you get to the election, the easier it is to determine whether someone is likely to vote. Often, pollsters will begin the season by polling registered voters, and at some point down the line, they make the switch. Other pollsters will use a likely voter model from the beginning.

If we were to review all of the polling data at face value, likely voter polls would be mixed in with registered voter polls. There would be a consistent gap between the accurate likely voter polls and the inaccurate registered voter polls, which overestimate the Democrat's chances. Later, as the pollsters switch to polling likely voters, the Republican candidate would suddenly increase in the polls, showing momentum where perhaps there is none. Obviously, this is not an ideal situation.

To correct for these problems, Elephant Watcher will adjust the registered voter polls, marked by an asterisk (*), by three points in favor of the Republican candidate. To avoid confusion, the results will be listed the same; only the R+ or D+ number in front of the poll will be changed. (For example, a registered voter poll listed "Obama 45, Romney 46" will be counted as R+4 instead of R+1.) Polls of likely voters will be unaffected. The adjustment is three points, based on the average difference between registered and likely voter polls--diminished somewhat because it assumes a slight Republican bias on the part of Rasmussen polls.

Note that this won't necessarily produce good polling results for Mitt Romney: If Barack Obama is doing well in the polls, he will be ahead of Romney in both likely voter and registered voter polls. Note also that this is a temporary measure, since nearly all pollsters will be switching to likely voter polls in the coming months.

Since it's always better to use multiple polls rather than looking at one poll, the Polls page will include a poll average. This will be a simple average of the ten most recent polls. One final adjustment is that "daily tracking polls," which release polls every day (e.g. Gallup and Rasmussen) will only be added only once every three days. This is done for two reasons. First, the poll average would otherwise be overwhelmed by the large number of polls being released by Gallup and Rasmussen. Second, daily tracking polls include overlapping data. For example, a tracking poll might include polling data from Monday through Wednesday; the next day, from Tuesday through Thursday--reusing the same Tuesday and Wednesday data. Entering daily tracking polls only once every three days solves both problems.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 11:54:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 11:51:12 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
I follow the RCP average:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Of the ten pollsters in their average, only 1 has Romney winning (and that too by 1%).

Average is Obama up by 2.3%.

They take unreliable polls.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:04:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 10:32:21 PM, mongoose wrote:
http://www.intrade.com...

If you believe them, you should wage money here. Your odds would be better than the stock market.

No, Intrade is biased. And Elephant Watcher has explained that:

As with the Republican primary, which has essentially concluded, Intrade has a market for the presidential race. There are actually two markets for the general election at Intrade: One for which party will win the presidency, and one for which individual will win the presidency. It's better to look at the party market than the individual market; the individual market will always have a few percent floating around for remote possibilities like Barack Obama or Mitt Romney not winning their party's nomination.

Intrade currently posts a 55.9% chance for the Democrats to win, and 43.2% for the Republicans. Intrade has always been skeptical of the Republicans' chance of beating Obama in 2012. Intrade only briefly gave the Republicans as much as 50% to win, in early October last year. That moment of optimism was likely triggered by the downfall of Rick Perry in the polls at about that time. Intrade felt confident Romney would win the nomination, and obviously felt he would be a stronger general election candidate. But the long primary season seems to have worn away their confidence, such as it was.

In spite of this, Intrade's view of Romney's chances has gone up slightly in the last few weeks. For months, they had the Republican Party in the upper-'30s. Apparently a few weeks of watching close poll numbers between Romney and Obama has caused them to give Romney more credit.

Also of note is the Intrade market for Republican vice presidential nominee. U.S. Senator Rob Portman from Ohio currently leads with a 27.5% chance of being selected. U.S. Senator Marco Rubio from Florida is second with 22.1%. Everyone else is far below; there's a huge pack of potential candidates in single-digits. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is at 6.8%, and somehow Tim Pawlenty is in fourth at 6.2%. Rubio was once the clear favorite on Intrade, running in the '30s. But since April or so, his numbers have gone down in favor of Portman.

How should these numbers be interpreted? Intrade is a pretty good indicator of conventional wisdom. Intrade investors tend to lean left and reflect the opinions of Washington, D.C. Democrats. Very often the investors are not Americans (American law related to Intrade makes processing payments more cumbersome). They would tend to be influenced by their home countries' media, which is usually even farther-left than American media.

Therefore, unlike the Republican primary Intrade markets, in which the investors had less emotional stake, we can expect that Obama's odds will be inflated relative to what they probably ought to be. Democrats tend to overestimate their chance of victory in presidential elections: In every recent presidential election aside from 1984, Democrats have been confident of victory. (Republicans, if anything, tend to be more pessimistic than circumstances warrant.)

What about the VP nominee market? Portman's rise (at the expense of Rubio) has come from increasing buzz out of Washington political commentators. Unless the Romney camp is deliberately leaking information about their selection process--which is unlikely at this stage--the buzz around Portman may not actually reflect Romney's decision-making. In fact, it may be an attempt to influence it.

Left-leaning Intrade investors may be acting out of optimism even in the VP market. As we explained in the Candidate Rankings, Obama's most likely scenario for victory is one in which he successfully paints Romney as a retread of George W. Bush in terms of economic policy. The selection of Portman as VP would be very advantageous to Obama for this reason. By contrast, choosing Rubio would reinforce the idea that Romney intends to take the country in a new direction--while harming Obama in Florida and among Hispanics.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:11:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 11:54:33 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:51:12 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
I follow the RCP average:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Of the ten pollsters in their average, only 1 has Romney winning (and that too by 1%).

Average is Obama up by 2.3%.

They take unreliable polls.
Evidence?
Sapere Aude!
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 12:18:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:11:54 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:54:33 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:51:12 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
I follow the RCP average:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Of the ten pollsters in their average, only 1 has Romney winning (and that too by 1%).

Average is Obama up by 2.3%.

They take unreliable polls.
Evidence?

They don't properly adjust them like Elephant Watcher does. I posted the article explaining this above in response to 16kadams.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 1:01:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:04:38 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 7/14/2012 10:32:21 PM, mongoose wrote:
http://www.intrade.com...

If you believe them, you should wage money here. Your odds would be better than the stock market.

No, Intrade is biased. And Elephant Watcher has explained that:

As with the Republican primary, which has essentially concluded, Intrade has a market for the presidential race. There are actually two markets for the general election at Intrade: One for which party will win the presidency, and one for which individual will win the presidency. It's better to look at the party market than the individual market; the individual market will always have a few percent floating around for remote possibilities like Barack Obama or Mitt Romney not winning their party's nomination.

Intrade currently posts a 55.9% chance for the Democrats to win, and 43.2% for the Republicans. Intrade has always been skeptical of the Republicans' chance of beating Obama in 2012. Intrade only briefly gave the Republicans as much as 50% to win, in early October last year. That moment of optimism was likely triggered by the downfall of Rick Perry in the polls at about that time. Intrade felt confident Romney would win the nomination, and obviously felt he would be a stronger general election candidate. But the long primary season seems to have worn away their confidence, such as it was.

In spite of this, Intrade's view of Romney's chances has gone up slightly in the last few weeks. For months, they had the Republican Party in the upper-'30s. Apparently a few weeks of watching close poll numbers between Romney and Obama has caused them to give Romney more credit.

Also of note is the Intrade market for Republican vice presidential nominee. U.S. Senator Rob Portman from Ohio currently leads with a 27.5% chance of being selected. U.S. Senator Marco Rubio from Florida is second with 22.1%. Everyone else is far below; there's a huge pack of potential candidates in single-digits. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is at 6.8%, and somehow Tim Pawlenty is in fourth at 6.2%. Rubio was once the clear favorite on Intrade, running in the '30s. But since April or so, his numbers have gone down in favor of Portman.

How should these numbers be interpreted? Intrade is a pretty good indicator of conventional wisdom. Intrade investors tend to lean left and reflect the opinions of Washington, D.C. Democrats. Very often the investors are not Americans (American law related to Intrade makes processing payments more cumbersome). They would tend to be influenced by their home countries' media, which is usually even farther-left than American media.

Therefore, unlike the Republican primary Intrade markets, in which the investors had less emotional stake, we can expect that Obama's odds will be inflated relative to what they probably ought to be. Democrats tend to overestimate their chance of victory in presidential elections: In every recent presidential election aside from 1984, Democrats have been confident of victory. (Republicans, if anything, tend to be more pessimistic than circumstances warrant.)

What about the VP nominee market? Portman's rise (at the expense of Rubio) has come from increasing buzz out of Washington political commentators. Unless the Romney camp is deliberately leaking information about their selection process--which is unlikely at this stage--the buzz around Portman may not actually reflect Romney's decision-making. In fact, it may be an attempt to influence it.

Left-leaning Intrade investors may be acting out of optimism even in the VP market. As we explained in the Candidate Rankings, Obama's most likely scenario for victory is one in which he successfully paints Romney as a retread of George W. Bush in terms of economic policy. The selection of Portman as VP would be very advantageous to Obama for this reason. By contrast, choosing Rubio would reinforce the idea that Romney intends to take the country in a new direction--while harming Obama in Florida and among Hispanics.

So why don't they, or you, bet money on intrade? Also, you don't have enough evidence to claim that they're right every time. You need more samples and the like.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 1:25:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/15/2012 12:18:26 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 7/15/2012 12:11:54 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:54:33 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 7/15/2012 11:51:12 AM, Apollo.11 wrote:
I follow the RCP average:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

Of the ten pollsters in their average, only 1 has Romney winning (and that too by 1%).

Average is Obama up by 2.3%.

They take unreliable polls.
Evidence?

They don't properly adjust them like Elephant Watcher does. I posted the article explaining this above in response to 16kadams.
The poll a large, representative sampling of the prospective voters. What is unreliable and flawed about that? And I will take the average of 10 reputed pollsters over some right-wing blog.
Sapere Aude!
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 1:29:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/14/2012 10:25:33 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 7/14/2012 7:10:41 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Obama will win :(

Get over it.

Unsubstantiated assertion is unsubstantiated.

You expect Obama to be beaten by the guy who lost to the guy who lost to him?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord