BigEd76 wrote:Romney's visit to Yardley

Seeing on FB that he showed up hours late and they wouldn't let anyone leave if they were freezing

yup

http://americablog.com/2012/11/romney-s ... og+News%29

BigEd76 wrote:Romney's visit to Yardley

Seeing on FB that he showed up hours late and they wouldn't let anyone leave if they were freezing

The secret service wasn't letting people leave out the secure, secret service blocked exit, and liberals on twitter were whining about the Romney campaign trying to keep people there.

PPP almost made it through every single swing state with Obama up. Romney/Obama tied 49/49 in North Carolina, but they note Romney's actually up 49.4-49.2%.

A really annoying thing to me PREDICTION wise is some of the most likely outcomes (modally) if you're breaking this into ten EV segments I think at this point are Obama with 270-279 or 280-289. Both of those points are places where 538's model would be somewhat off, and no one would bust his balls about it since Obama won.

The three outcomes which occur 10% or more in 538's models are Obama winning all of the swing states, Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina, and Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina and Florida. Obama winning all of the swing states (including NC) is as likely as Romney winning the election per 538. I'm not brimming with confidence that Mitt is going to win this thing on Tuesday, but I'd feel pretty fucking confident putting a lot of $$ on him breaking 270 vs. Obama winning all of CO/VA/FL/NC.

Why do you want people to bust his balls if he's wrong? I know you want Romney to win and all so you want him to be wrong, but your post just seems a little...uh...vindictive towards him. I'm sure if his model's wrong he'll feel bad enough and probably try to make some changes to it.

Also, this is like the 20th post you've mentioned on betting on Romney so just fucking do it already.

Lucky for Mittens it's a bit too late in the game because there's soundbite fodder at around 3:15 and 4:40

I have zero trust that the election will not have any state corruption either disenfranchising many Dems, or worse.

Phan In Phlorida wrote:

Lucky for Mittens it's a bit too late in the game because there's soundbite fodder at around 3:15 and 4:40

Pip, this one got knocked about here a little bit around a month ago.

clips from the latter segment you noted have been making the rounds, used to underscore Mitt's flippy-floppy inclinations

I think it's more remarkable for his display of temper and for the fact that over the 5+ minutes, he never gets it under control.

SK790 wrote:Why do you want people to bust his balls if he's wrong? I know you want Romney to win and all so you want him to be wrong, but your post just seems a little...uh...vindictive towards him. I'm sure if his model's wrong he'll feel bad enough and probably try to make some changes to it.

Also, this is like the 20th post you've mentioned on betting on Romney so just fucking do it already.

It's like Joe Sheehan talking about the Phillies if every single person you interacted with for months on end dismissed the Phillies chances of winning by saying "Well they're not going to win, Joe Sheehan has the Rays as 85% favorites." I want him to be thoroughly wrong and embarrassed.

And I don't live in Las Vegas

jerseyhoya wrote:A really annoying thing to me PREDICTION wise is some of the most likely outcomes (modally) if you're breaking this into ten EV segments I think at this point are Obama with 270-279 or 280-289. Both of those points are places where 538's model would be somewhat off, and no one would bust his balls about it since Obama won.

The three outcomes which occur 10% or more in 538's models are Obama winning all of the swing states, Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina, and Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina and Florida. Obama winning all of the swing states (including NC) is as likely as Romney winning the election per 538. I'm not brimming with confidence that Mitt is going to win this thing on Tuesday, but I'd feel pretty fucking confident putting a lot of $$ on him breaking 270 vs. Obama winning all of CO/VA/FL/NC.

There's no way Obama has a 15% chance of winning CO/VA/FL/NC. His odds of each (according to Silver) are 70, 73, 45, 23. Isn't that more like a 5% chance?

Philly the Kid wrote:I have zero trust that the election will not have any state corruption either disenfranchising many Dems, or worse.

Don't worry, several states enacted Id laws and shortened voting times enough that they won't even have to cheat.

After dealing with my first daylight savings time with an infant in the house, I am now willing to vote for whichever candidate will promise to abolish daylight savings time.

It just occurred to me that if the nuts on the Right* are proven correct about the election in the face of most of the poll evidence, it'll become even more difficult to convince them about other evidence-backed arguments, such as the reality of climate change or that tax cuts don't always spur growth or that torture is counterproductive. It could serve to validate every instance of dumbassed, clap-for-Tinkerbell magical thinking in their worldview.

So yeah, stakes are high here.

*not talking about the likes of jh, who simply want to believe and possibly don't share these other views I'm mentioning anyway, but dolts like Hannity or the Unskewed asshole

seke2 wrote:After dealing with my first daylight savings time with an infant in the house, I am now willing to vote for whichever candidate will promise to abolish daylight savings time.

Move to Arizona.

Philly the Kid wrote:I have zero trust that the election will not have any state corruption either disenfranchising many Dems, or worse.

The Democrats stealing the election talk is starting to make its rounds. Some rabid radio host must have told his listeners to go park in public places and turn their radios up as loud as they can yesterday. It was a little bizarre to go to the library then the grocery passing several cars with old men amplifying this message via open car windows and cranked radios. I only hear enough to get that election fraud would be assured if Obama wins and that the costs of that victory will be Chinese cars with (former) American name plates and that senior will be gutted as expendable in favor of the inner city poor (obviously intoning non-white).

Come on Wednesday! I cannot wait.

I have not seen anything about Vote YES/NO on 7. This is an MD topic, but it is the other constant on the radio and TV. People in MD tell me that it is an extra 10 calls a day!!! Essentially, the vote is about an actual casino in MD where they would have gaming tables, etc. To get that kind of gaming, MD has to go out of state (I am completely unaware of any casino style gaming in VA - but I don't obviously care either).

It is reported that Penn National Gaming has spent ~$60M in protecting its full gaming in MD border holdings in PA & WV. Interestingly, the company has two locations in MD as well, but table gaming is the divide. Also, one assumes, that PNG is not in the mix for the new casino slated to be just out side of D.C.

JUburton wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:A really annoying thing to me PREDICTION wise is some of the most likely outcomes (modally) if you're breaking this into ten EV segments I think at this point are Obama with 270-279 or 280-289. Both of those points are places where 538's model would be somewhat off, and no one would bust his balls about it since Obama won.

The three outcomes which occur 10% or more in 538's models are Obama winning all of the swing states, Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina, and Obama winning all of the swing states except North Carolina and Florida. Obama winning all of the swing states (including NC) is as likely as Romney winning the election per 538. I'm not brimming with confidence that Mitt is going to win this thing on Tuesday, but I'd feel pretty fucking confident putting a lot of $$ on him breaking 270 vs. Obama winning all of CO/VA/FL/NC.

There's no way Obama has a 15% chance of winning CO/VA/FL/NC. His odds of each (according to Silver) are 70, 73, 45, 23. Isn't that more like a 5% chance?

No because the outcomes are not independent

how are they dependent, he asks, statistically curious and non-politically....

Where can you see scenarios like that broken down on 538? I can't seem to find it. I'll take your word for it, but I'm interested to see it. It just doesn't make intuitive sense to me that they would be that related. I understand the logic that 'well if he's polling that well in 3 of the swing states, he is very likely polling well in the 4th', but it seems like a big jump.