Laexile wrote:

BuddyGroom wrote:I guess people have seen the big swing back toward Obama at 538.com

Not unexpected. McCain's bump was attributed to his convention bounce. That usually wears off. They are back pretty much where they were before the conventions.

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Thanks for linking to that, dajafi. I especially liked the denial of evolution and denial of free trade parallel.

I did too. Dude can write.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Anecdotally, people at my workplace do seem to go to the doctor for every trivial thing. They also look down on me for not going over affliction I'm sure will heal on it's own.

TenuredVulture wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Thanks for linking to that, dajafi. I especially liked the denial of evolution and denial of free trade parallel.

I did too. Dude can write.

It's not really that novel an idea. It's a good one though.

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Thanks for linking to that, dajafi. I especially liked the denial of evolution and denial of free trade parallel.

I did too. Dude can write.

It's not really that novel an idea. It's a good one though.

I used it in the last thread.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

dajafi wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Thanks for linking to that, dajafi. I especially liked the denial of evolution and denial of free trade parallel.

I did too. Dude can write.

It's not really that novel an idea. It's a good one though.

I used it in the last thread.

It goes back farther than that.

dajafi wrote:My point is that there's blame to go around for the dismal state of the national conversation.

dajafi wrote:While this is good news in the sense that it's favorable for my candidate, in another I think it just kind of makes me doubt Nate's model. Obama gained something like 25 points of "win percentage" in two days!

On the strength of an abundance of state and national polling, Barack Obama has retaken the lead in our Electoral College projection. Our model now forecasts him to win the election 61.2 percent of the time; it also gives him a slight, half-point advantage in the popular vote. Yesterday, Obama was projected to win the Electoral College just 45 percent of the time, so this is a rather dramatic move upward.

How can the numbers move so sharply in just 24 hours? I have tweaked the model slightly at a couple of points recently in order to make it more sensitive to new information. But these adjustments are very minor, and their effects are fairly trivial. The principal reasons these numbers have become more volatile are twofold. Firstly, we're finally getting into crunch time. The closer we get to the election, the smaller the true margins of error in the polls, so relatively small advantages can become more meaningful. But secondly, we have a lot more data to look at. If Barack Obama looks like he's moved up a point or two between two or three polls, that may not be particularly meaningful, and our model will tend to treat it as noise. If, on the other hand, Obama appears to have gained a point or two between 20 or 30 polls, which is what we're getting on a daily basis nowadays, we can say with more certainty that a real shift in the electorate has occurred.

The Dude wrote:I asked this before, and didn't get an answer, and I missed the deadline on the last politics thread, but how is Ron Paul a "crazy" libertarian? Looking at all his beliefs, he's the definition of a libertarian. So why is someone like RT, who is a self-proclaimed libertarian, calling him a bad example? Thanks in advance.