Nate Silver: Ohio is not a toss-up

[WI_DEM]

Ohio Is Not a Toss Up
Nate Silver looks at the polling average in Ohio -- made up of roughly a dozen polling firms who have surveyed the state over the past 10 days -- and notes it shows President Obama with a 2.4 percentage point lead over Mitt Romney.

"There are no precedents in the database for a candidate losing with a two- or three-point lead in a state when the polling volume was that rich... It is misinformed to refer to Ohio as a toss-up. Mr. Obama is the favorite there, and because of Ohio's central position in the Electoral College, he is therefore the overall favorite in the election."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/10/27/ohio_is_not_a_toss_up.html

[BlueDemKev]

1. All I know is...

...Nate had better be right in his predictions! He alone has helped me keep my hopes after the disastrous first debate.

[WI_DEM]

2. well this is based on the polls all of which show Obama up in Ohio

not to mention well ahead there in early voting.

[Justice4All1]

6. Nate had better get some good bodyguards, Rethugs want his head on a silver platter

Heck they'll take it on any platter when liar Myth's been running around saying he's winning and he has momentum. lol

Exactly, he's way ahead in early voting, Myth's lost but continues to waste money there, so much the better for us.

[calimary]

14. YEAH! I think about that a lot, too. All the money that those koch schmucks, adelson, the swiftboat

bankroller-developer who owns Perry Homes in Texas, and all the rest of those vermin have dumped into this election. What a lovely thought that they might just be throwing all those hundreds of millions of dollars AWAY...

That would make me SO happy! And then take their fucking tax cuts AWAY too!!!!!!

[groundloop]

17. Speaking of them throwing their money away -

Someone else suggested this and it's a good point.... The mediocre first debate might just have been a blessing in disguise in that a lot of money that may have otherwise been spent on House and Senate seats went instead to rMoney.

[calimary]

28. That's an intriguing thought.

I just want them to be spending like Imelda Marcos-meets-Kim-Kardashian, and wind up with NOTHING to show for it.

[ginnyinWI]

27. fine, but as for early voting--

would it not be true that people who actually like their candidate would vote early (Obama)? The repubs I know really don't like Mitt, and are only going to vote against Obama, so maybe they would drag their feet a bit and not vote early.

[Justice4All1]

9. OMG, will you Dems cut it out, the 1st debate was NOT disastrous, it was decent for Obama.

Sometimes Dems are their own worst enemies.

The first debate only became disastrous because you had such high expectations for Barack & low expectations for Rmoney, so when RMoney lied through his teeth eceeding expectations the gullible media blew it out of proportion.

But watch all 3 debates, Obama is great in all three, obviously much better in the last 2 because he said what we wanted him to say & he was aggressive.

But his first debate was decent just not great, it was never disastrous, just because MSM lied & said this doesn't mean it was disastrous. Obama was amazing in the last 2 debates & Biden was absolutely mesmerizing.

I can't wait for Hillary/biden 2016.

[12AngryBorneoWildmen]

22. U R Right.

But re: HRC-I would bet my bottom dollar (all I've got are a few bottom dollars) that she will not run. Love her and Joe, but futures position is Cuomo. Maybe Cuomo/Franken.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

23. "Sometimes Dems are their own worst enemies."

I posted earlier an anonymous quote from a pollster. "When you give Republicans bad news, they want to kill you. When you give Democrats bad news, they want to kill themselves."

For us being fun and fancy free we sure do have a lot of people who love to sink into a deep blue funk.

[klook]

51. Great quote and so true.

I hadn't heard that one before. Thanks.

[Cha]

30. Thanks for this, Justice4All!

[NYC Liberal]

35. Dems bought right into the GOP/media framing after the 1st debate.

They should have come out swinging against Romney for his lying and rejected the idea that he "won" because he "sounded" better. Instead, they joined the Repubs in slamming Obama non-stop and went on and on with hysterical hand wringing.

[xtraxritical]

42. The first debate was Muhammad Ali's famous "rope a dope" trick and with all Romney's changed

positions and lies it was better to give him the rope to hang himself than give him credibility.

[Flying Squirrel]

49. Hillary/Biden?

Surely you must mean Biden/someone else. Or Hillary/someone else. Biden ran in the primaries, there's no reason he'd want to be VP another 4-8 years.Hillary's not gonna wait 4-8 years more to run, she would be too old after that Yikes.... now you've scared me, are we in for another brutal primary in 2016 - Biden against Hillary?

[dangerdoll]

54. Julian Castro.

Loved his keynote at the DNC. Also, he went to Harvard. So he meets both prerequisites for the presidency.

Castro/Clinton! The bumper sticker possibilities are endless! Or Castro/Franken? Hells yeah too!

[Maximumnegro]

46. That's sad. Maybe you should have

listened to the campaign, you know, for the party you belong to? Because they've pretty much explained the state of the race several times over the past few weeks. But hey, if it's easier to just get hysterical just make sure you're stocked up on smelling salts.

[morningfog]

3. I like when Nate backs me up:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251160390

[Laura PourMeADrink]

32. LOL. Maybe it is us he should be consulting with before he makes a prediction. And

I am not kidding.

[MFM008]

4. in 2008 he was spot but except Indiana

that tipped for Obama and he didnt have it down. It was a plus. 2010 I guess he was on target as well. Anyway who better him or Gallup or Rassmessusen.

[INdemo]

19. With the early voter turnout so far in Northern/Northwest Indiana

and really from what I hear all across our state..call me crazy but I think its possible that Obama could carry Indiana again
......Now dont every one yell at me at the same time, but I think its possible !!

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/10/24/14672678-pics-early-voting-in-indianapolis?lite

[BlueMTexpat]

38. I'll keep hoping with you!

But I am hoping even more that Mourdock is NOT elected to the Senate. I would thank IN for that alone. Sen Lugar is a decent man, even if he did fall under McConnell's implacable iron thumb too much of late. He did not deserve to lose to lower-than-pond-scum like Mourdock.

But - if IN does tip for the Prez again, no one will be more delighted than I! So hang in there, IN Dems (and any disillusioned Reps who might join in as well)!

[timlot]

5. I hope he right too.

Its not in his best interest to wrong, especially by such a large percentage.

[Justice4All1]

7. Don't worry, Nate's not wrong. He knows what he's doing.

The man's a genius in his field.

[calimary]

15. Welcome to DU, timlot!

I know what you mean. I've been clinging to Nate Silver's projections as though they were some sort of life raft. Thank God we have them!

Glad you're here! We need you! Let's make sure Nate Silver's predictions stand, safely, securely, and favorably of course!!!







Now get to work.

[CrazyOrangeCat]

8. Thanks! n/t

[deadbrokediva]

10. Can't wait for this to be over

I generally don't pay attention to any polls but I hope he's right. November 6th can't come fast enough for me.

[blazeKing]

11. Nate has totally trashed and burned the Romney Rove false momentum ploy

[CloneClinton]

12. Nate

In Nate we trust

[calimary]

16. Welcome to DU, CloneClinton, blazeKing, and deadbrokediva!

Glad you're all here! We need you! Here's hoping each of you can help us keep Barack Obama in the White House, and a Democratic majority in the United States Senate.






Now get to work!

[flamingdem]

13. Got that Bliztmeister? n/t

[jenmito]

18. We need to send this to the MSM. They're still talking about "Mittmentum."

[WillyT]

20. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You Nate !!!

[Major Hogwash]

21. Nate has done a great disservice by including Gravis Marketing in his analysis.

And for more than a week, he refuses to remove Gravis Marketing''s polling numbers from his analysis.
He includes a lot more polling numbers than just Gallup to make his analysis, but he also includes Gravis Marketing, and I think that is a mistake.

[cleduc]

31. I think Nate factors them

so they and many of the flimsy GOP slanted pollsters don't get full weight that often

[FBaggins]

24. No precedents?

I think I can come close.

If you ignore the clear outlier Gallup poll that showed Kerry ahead by 4 in Ohio, the remaining several polls showed Bush up by 3 points.

Many don't believe that he really won the state, but if he did... it was by less than the difference between that average and the current one.

It's clear that this isn't a tossup... but I wouldn't decide that it's in the bag yet.

[abumbyanyothername]

34. The internals

The internals numbers that both campaigns have now show the race is over in OH.

IMNSHO.

[lobodons]

25. SSSHHHHH!!!!!!

Don't tell the main stream media aboutthis. Their ratings need a tight race.

[mercymechap]

26. Let's hope you are

exactly right. I wouldn't put it past the Reps to try and steal this election, and now with Romney's son's voting machines - who knows. I just hope I'm over-reacting.

[craigmatic]

29. Niether is WI.

[abumbyanyothername]

33. Then

[link:][/link]

[Always Randy]

41. This is politics, so let us not use opera images.

and say that "it's not over until Rush Limbaugh sings"

[Duke Newcombe]

36. Is it just me...

or does anyone eles automatically apply a -2 percentage point adjustment to the President's numbers there, to adjust for the "Bradley Phenomenon"? Never discount the power of racism.

[fascisthunter]

37. so now you should know the corporate media is slanting predictions

for the outcome of our elections. Any American who seriously considers themselves as being a Patriot should be considering reasons as to why, and if those reasons are an attack on their democratic rights. What makes us Americans free is the idea that we each determine the course of our country's future. If you are one who believes cheating our system for your own political party's agenda is acceptable, you forfeit your own freedoms as well as all others. I consider those who identify with the later as being traitors to our country.

[BigPaul25]

39. Ohio Polls showing a tie today

What do we know about some of the polls showing a tie in Ohio today? One caused Nate to move Romney's chance of winning up a percentage point. I do know one was from the Examiner that questioned Nate's sexuality the other day.

[budkin]

40. It's obvious that without vote flipping BO will win OH

[Always Randy]

43. It's not over until Rush Limbaugh sings!

Lest we disparage any of our favorite opera stars --I will call Rush on Monday and request Mozart's Ruhe Sanft.

[dynasaw]

44. Ohio gov. predicts Romney win as auto politics dominate

"Ohio's Republican governor said Sunday that private polls show Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney beating President Barack Obama in the all-important battleground state of Ohio just as auto industry politics assume a dominant role in the closing days of the campaign.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) predicted outright that Romney would win Ohio on "Meet the Press" and, with it, the presidential election — a overall contest which Kasich said wouldn't be that close.
"Right now, I believe we're currently ahead. Internals show us currently ahead," he said, referring to the private polling candidates routinely conduct. "Honestly, I believe that Romney is going to carry Ohio."

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/28/14757523-ohio-gov-predicts-romney-win-as-auto-politics-dominate?lite

[JanT]

45. I guess the early voters need to prove mr (loosely said) Kasich wrong nt

[Deep13]

47. No, not since summer. nt

[colsohlibgal]

48. Nate Is A Sane Voice In The Wilderness

The Columbus Dispatch's lead front page story was a joke this morning, the news that their poll showed a 49-49 tie. They have had a long standing republican bent so I take the story and whatever methodology they used with an enormous grain of salt.

Part of me thinks that the race is being portrayed closer than it is, particularly electorally. But always with the paranoia nurtured by 2000 and 2004.

I'll be glad when it's over ( I think).

[cheezmaka]

50. Thanks WI_Dem!

Thanks to Nate also. Somebody needs to tell the truth!

[sebastianj333]

52. I still can't believe it's that close....

I mean WHO in their right minds would vote for Romney?

I just can't believe the election is even this close...granted Obama has disappointed me more than once, but no way in hell I would consider voting for Romney....all I can do is shake my head, however, you may wish to read this:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/10/nate-silver-romney-clearly-could-still-win-147618.html

Nate Silver: One-term celebrity?

"Romney, clearly, could still win," Silver told POLITICO today.

Prediction is the name of Silver's game, the basis for his celebrity. So should Mitt Romney win on Nov. 6, it's difficult to see how people can continue to put faith in the predictions of someone who has never given that candidate anything higher than a 41 percent chance of winning (way back on June 2) and — one week from the election — gives him a one-in-four chance, even as the polls have him almost neck-and-neck with the incumbent.

Silver cautions against confusing prediction with prophecy. "If the Giants lead the Redskins 24-21 in the fourth quarter, it's a close game that either team could win. But it's also not a "toss-up": The Giants are favored. It's the same principle here: Obama is ahead in the polling averages in states like Ohio that would suffice for him to win the Electoral College. Hence, he's the favorite," Silver said.

For all the confidence Silver puts in his predictions, he often gives the impression of hedging. Which, given all the variables involved in a presidential election, isn't surprising. For this reason and others — and this may shock the coffee-drinking NPR types of Seattle, San Francisco and Madison, Wis. — more than a few political pundits and reporters, including some of his own colleagues, believe Silver is highly overrated.

"If you tell me you think you can quantify an event that is about to happen that you don`t expect, like the 47 percent comment or a debate performance, I think you think you are a wizard. That`s not possible," Times columnist David Brooks, a moderate conservative, said on PBS earlier this month. "The pollsters tell us what`s happening now. When they start projecting, they`re getting into silly land."

[johnnyrocket]

53. Ohio is a state that must stay a "toss up" for the Republicans to hold on to any hope of winning...

...it's all mind games and tactics at this point.

[jonpaulprime]

55. VERY reassuring

[davidn3600]

56. Some of you don't seem to understand probability

Nate Silver bases his stuff on statistical probability. When he says Ohio is not a toss-up, it does not mean that Obama has it in the bag.

Right now Obama has according to a Nate a 75% chance of winning. That means if you were to run this election 100 times, Obama would win 75 of them...but it also means Obama would lose 25 of them. When the weather man says there is a 20% chance of rain, that doesn't mean it won't rain. That just means that out of 100 days just like today, it won't rain in 80 of them. In 20 of them it will rain.

Statistically speaking, a "toss-up" means the probability is 50/50. The same as a flip of a coin. Ohio is not a "toss-up" because Obama is favored there. But it doesn't mean Romney can't win. Just like a baseball game. When one team is leading in the top of the 9th, they are favored to win and would probably win most of the time. But that doesn't mean the other team can't catch up in the bottom of the 9th.

So there is some semantic confusion here. Even if Romney wins Ohio and wins the election, Nate Silver is still technically correct. Because he gives Romney a 1 out of 4 chance of winning. Unless Nate gives Obama a 100% chance of winning, Romney still has a statistical path of victory.

[Alekei_Firebird]

57. Just imagine if Romney had a 75% chance of winning OH

We'd be so depressed here, and rightfully so. That's a huge hill to climb.

[wisteria]

58. True, and it is important to get the vote out.

But, I never bring an umbrella when they say their is a 25% chance of ran, but take the time to find one when they say a 75% chance of ran. The glass is almost full, not a little empty.