Omens of Doom? - Nate Silver gives 4-to-1 odds against a Romney win

The American Spectator ^ | September 10, 2012 | Robert Stacy McCain

[Cincinatus' Wife]

................But why bring Nate Silver into this?

Silver is the poll-analyzing guru of the New York Times, whose reputation as a wizard was developed in crunching baseball statistics before being applied to political campaigns. On Saturday afternoon, Silver published an analysis which asserted that Obama now has a nearly 80 percent chance of winning the election, with 317 Electoral College votes and 52 percent of the popular vote. All of which is very interesting -- and very important, if true.

However,....I recall the Sunday in October 2010 when I arrived in New York's 25th Congressional District and was greeted by a Syracuse Post-Standard headline proclaiming that Democrat Rep. Dan Maffei had opened up a 12-point lead over Republican challenger Ann Marie Buerkle with barely two weeks remaining until Election Day. There was a mood of grim determination at the Buerkle campaign events I attended that Sunday and Monday, and I was far from certain that she could pull off an upset. On Election Night, the vote was "too close to call" and it was only after an extended recount that Buerkle was declared the winner -- two days before Thanksgiving -- by a margin of fewer than 600 votes........

Was Buerkle's victory a miraculous comeback? Had she actually erased a 12-point deficit in the span of 16 days? Of course not. The poll by Siena College was simply wrong, based on a faulty sample, and her chances of beating Maffei were as good on Sunday, Oct. 17, as they were on Tuesday, Nov. 2........however, its publication as front-page news in the Syracuse paper posed a real danger to her campaign, one she addressed at a rally with her supporters. "I don't want anyone to let this discourage you," Buerkle said the day after the poll was published. ".........

[Lakeshark]

If I may be so bold: Perry shot his own self in the foot early, it had nothing to do with him being ganged up on.

He apparently was drugged because of his back surgery, and simply couldn't give cogent explanations in the early debates, removing him from front runner status in most voters eyes.

His "heartless" comments about illegals hurt him as well. He did it all by himself, and couldn't recover.

[xzins]

I believe there is a very real threat of an Obama victory.

See this post

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2928880/posts?page=9#9

[napscoordinator]

52 percent of the popular vote.

Even with the worst Republican candidate in the history of the Republican party chosen, I cannot see Obama losing only one percent of the popular vote from 2008.

[InterceptPoint]

Real money has Obama at 53% Romney 47%
+++++++++++++
Unfortunately it’s more like 58% to 42% on Intrade. It’s been at that ratio for awhile. Obama still the favorite but no real post-convention bounce.

[xzins]

I respect what you say, but I differ with your opinion for reasons already listed.

[ontap]

He asked what I was doing. I told him I’m supporting Virgil Goode(A nobody who has zero chance to win who can only help "O"). He said he’d not heard of him. I told him to look it up. He said, “He’s on the ballot in Ohio?”

[napscoordinator]

I just listened to Trump on Fox and Friends minutes ago.

Did he announce his BIG news that he was supposed to at the convention. This guy is full of hot air. He has been doing that all year long. Making these announcements that never come to be. I know Brietbart made some statements that they had some heavy duty ammo against Obama after releasing the birth certificate but haven’t heard a peep since. Sheriff Joe is another who had this huge news conference and basically said NOTHING and then mentioned he had more “big” stuff to release....nothing as of yet. I just don’t understand why people say this crap if they don’t have anything to back it up.

[xzins]

Campaigns that included social issues have won:

Reagan 1, Reagan 2, GHWBush 1 (reagan coattails), GW Bush 1, GW Bush 2

Campaigns that have not included social issues have lost:

Ford, Dole, GHW Bush 2, and McCain

If you want to be complete, you’d recall that Jimmy Carter ran his first campaign as an Evangelical Christian with Jesus in His heart.

He won that campaign.

[Carry_Okie]

You should change the "OMG" in the graphic to "OHIO."

Because, so far, it's true.

[Lakeshark]

One thing we can both agree with is that Perry would have been preferred by both of us to Romney. Actually, that would be a no contest preference.

Perry wasn't my first choice, I ranked him as third in my early preferences, and had Palin run I would have ranked him fourth. I do think he would have been a candidate we could have all gotten behind had he won.

I was a bit too hard on him early; when he came out of his stupor at the end I really came to appreciate his abilities, it was simply too late then and he got behind Newt.

[Gene Eric]

The argument is lost when arms are being twisted.

My only concern is the net gain for the benefit of Life & Liberty.

Can Romney’s antagonists honestly state that the well-being of nascent life will be better off with another Obama term? No, they cannot.

I’m aware of the fight between the elder factions. It wasn’t obvious at first, but it’s become clear over time. While I stand with Conservatives, this is not the time to settle the score with the jackwagons in the GOP-E.

We have the opportunity in each cycle to make a difference, but once we’re in the General phase, our attention must be focused on the larger threat.

FWIW, I respect the passive vote, but it’s regrettable nonetheless.

[Gene Eric]

>> See this post

Thanks.

[xzins]

Goode is on our ballot, so it is not insignificant when principles voters have him first on their list.

You might not like it. You might hate it. You might rail against it.

But you can’t change it.

[InterceptPoint]

If you want to "calibrate" Nate Silver, it turns out that you can search old Nate Silver articles on his NYT Blog website. Here are a couple worth looking at from just before the 2010 election:

5 Reasons Democrats Could Beat the Polls and Hold the House"

House Forecast: G.O.P. Plus 54-55 Seats; Significantly Larger or Smaller Gains Possible

The first article is wildly optimistic. The second is just way off. We won 63 seats and the majority of the polling late in the election cycle predicted a 60+ gain by the House GOP.

[xzins]

I went out of my way NOT to twist arms. I even explained the ABO position to him in a positive way.

However, he was remained focused on principles. Who knows what he’ll decide in the next 2 months, but he knows his pastor cannot give an endorsement to Mitt Romney.

[pallis]

I’ll take those odds. Romney is going to win big.

[Lazamataz]

Silver is the poll-analyzing guru of the New York Times

THERE'S your problem.

[xzins]

It was a shame to lose him from the race...a praying conservative.

By the time the Bachmann/Romneyites were done with him, you’d have thought he deserved a place of honor alongside some specter that had combined Vladimir Lenin and George Wallace. It was shameful, and the major reason I turned against Bachman.

[Lazamataz]

Ease back from the ledge, hon. It’s convention bounce, and it’s transitory.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Thanks.

Don’t see that here.

Not that it’s surprizing. (Peoples Republic of California)

Much appreciated.