January 28, 2014
— CAC This is a post that is long-overdue, and one I felt I owed the readers & cobs of Ace of Spades HQ along with the Ewok himself. I warn that it is a very long read, and I implore you to read it as seriously as I wrote it. It's the rare instance of someone publicly admitting how badly they screwed up, so ready your pillowcases-filled-with-soap, and dive in.
I take the election-related work I contribute here seriously. I felt a great sense of responsibility when Ace asked me to co-blog with a focus on elections and polling back in 2010, because I had been given an opportunity to do something I've always had a passion for. Everything I've managed to do since he gave me the keys is a direct result of that opportunity. I have a day job, art, and the stars, but the interest closest to my heart (besides my wife) has been elections. This opportunity- blathering about them and having people, some of whom are very influential, take you seriously- is enormously important to me. So, this has been in the back of my mind for nearly fifteen months, and I touched on it in the comments late last week:
The general election, election night in particular, burned me to the core. I had spent months slowly networking a rag-tag group to do a live coverage thing for the blog intended to rival the AP's, much like what we did for the recall. John Ekdahl created a fabulously simple interactive map, did his computer magic so it would be easy for a hundred volunteers to update it live.Then the results started trickling in.
And things got bad.
And things got worse.
And I lost my nerve and became a bit unravelled.
A lot of volunteers got very depressed, and I can't blame them.
So I started drinking, and as the numbers continued to grow nastier and nastier, and way from what I had foolishly bought into (that the polls were "skewed", a mistake I will NEVER, EVER repeat)... it just all fell apart.
This was an ambitious project I wanted to pull off- successfully- for Ace, because he gave me the chance to cob for him and I wanted to prove just how "big" I could play.
And in the pit of despair over the sour results, I feel like I failed.
Miserably.
Many were expecting a better night. Certainly anyone who had read what I had written throughout that cycle would have. From that point forward, a post here about elections by me wasn't going to draw any new attention to the blog. It was going to draw eye-rolling and jokes.
So I want to talk about the election call I completely fucked up. For one, my partisan leanings took over and blinded me to the numbers right before my eyes, insisting instead to look at anecdotes and the questionable nature of some firms. Some pollsters deserved greater scrutiny, even if some of their final numbers were impressive. Nate Cohn, formerly of The New Republic, eviscerated one such pollster for not having much of a consistent methodology in a great set of reads here, here, here, and here.
But while it is true some pollsters probably posted misleading numbers here and there, and some have questionable methodologies, the averages of the polls aren't generally affected by one or two bad apples. Take a look at the final averages for the swing states in 2012 per RCP:
VA Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 0.3 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 3.9
PA Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 3.8 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 5.4
MN Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 6.0 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 7.7
WI Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 4.2 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 6.9
FL Poll Avg Winner: Romney Margin: 1.5 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: .9
NH Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 2.0 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 5.6
NV Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 2.8 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 6.7
MI Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 4.0 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 9.5
IA Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 2.4 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 5.8
NC Poll Avg Winner: Romney Margin: 3 Actual Winner: Romney Margin: 2
CO Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 1.5 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 5.4
NM Poll Avg Winner: Obama Margin: 10 Actual Winner: Obama Margin: 10.2
While most averages deviated from the margin won, all found the correct winner, with the exception of the Florida polls. Using JUST polling averages alone, you could have assumed Romney to gain only North Carolina, Indiana, and Florida as his consolation prizes, losing to Obama 235-303 (he actually lost Florida too, losing the EV by a grand total of 206-332). The simplest method of predicting- sourcing data gathered by various firms- will accurately predict the winner of the overall race. It was true in 2012 as it has been in all general elections in recent memory. Tweeking this, you can weigh polls based on the past-performance of the company releasing them, or the sample size, and perhaps get even closer to the margins (or nail all fifty states, like Nate Silver manged to do).
My biggest mistake was looking at the polls, disbelieving the D+x breakdown, and jumping on the "skewed" bandwagon. If I had simply gone with the tried-and-true, I would have been roared at for not believing in Romney pre-election, and would have been ribbed for missing Florida after, but I would have been right.
When it comes to elections, polls, and all that encircles that stuff, accuracy is the gauge by which we judge forecasters. I deserve every punch I've gotten in comments, on twitter, and in the hundreds of emails from distraught regulars asking me how I could blow it so badly (I really wish I was exaggerating that last bit). To those who referenced my work, who followed along, and who believed it, I'm sorry.
So, here's what I'm keeping in mind to avoid this.
1- Polls Uber Alles.
Polls are the best indicator we have for how A living in B feels about X at time Y. "My cousin says" and "I heard" are as plentiful as cat turds and just as useful. Yes, some firms can be screwy. Yes, others can put their thumb on the scales. But the averages of the polls rarely deviate from the winner of the race that was inquired about. Democrats shoved their fingers in their ears as Governor Scott Walker consistently led in every public poll released, and we did the same as the close of the 2012 cycle approached us.
2- In the absence of polls, consider other data.
What events could a given incumbent or incumbent party be tied to that could hurt them in the election?
How unpopular is this event/string of events?
Is there polling showing an impact on the incumbent?
How well are the incumbent's opponents fundraising?
All of these questions can help determine positioning a race on a scale ranging from solid Republican to solid Democrat.
Let me give you an example:
Oregon is host to a potentially competitive seat. No polling has been publicly released between Dr Monica Wehby and Senator Jeff Merkley, but polling has been released for other potential Republican contenders, and the Senator has enjoyed low double-digit advantages over them, while only in the mid-single digits against a few hypotheticals more well-known to Oregonians.
I have the race currently as moderately Democratic, meaning I do expect that double-digit advantage to drop into the single digits.
How can I call it that way?
Well, we know that his approval ratings took a hit from Obamacare, thanks to data released throughout 2013. He's currently more vulnerable than he was at the start of last year, though he can still expect to win as the race stands today and as the polling pitting him versus other candidates shows.
Republicans are dumping money in near-unknowns, (over $500k to Dr. Wehby in Q4 2013), so it appears the challenger may get enough funds to actually mount an attempt, though not enough as it stands to really, really make the race interesting.
The curveball needed to make a normally slam-dunk race competitive- strong dissatisfaction with a national policy (or several) that the candidate has a direct association with- has been playing out in Oregon media, as the state exchange program has become a 9-figure embarassment.
Without data comparing the match-up I see happening post-primary, Wehby v Merkley, pegging this race as moderately Democratic seems prudent: Merkley is favored to win, and by a considerable though not overwhelming margin, but will face heat over a souring policy within his state, growing if it fails to get fixed fast. If polls start dropping showing him crushing her by 20 points, well, it's a no-brainer which direction I send the race.
3- When polls become plentiful, all other factors will take a back-seat.
Many prognosticators still have Michigan as lean-Democrat, due mainly to the nature of the state and past election results. However, polling has shown the race to be very tight, and now slightly leaning in the Republican's favor. Some have changed their initial calls to reflect this, most notably Charlie Cook. If the polling data keeps showing this, expect all of the polling whizzes to follow suit: once you have data, and a considerable amount of it, running counter to your initial call, your call will change. This doesn't mean completely ignoring all of the on-the-ground details (ad buys, surprising turnout at a rally, etc), but they won't override the winner/loser indicated by the polling.
4- You may be partisan, but the averaged data, piling as the months pass, is not.
If the electorate seems notably partisan across the average in your favor, you'll delight as the numbers look good, if it appears partisan against you, suck time. But guess what? Your personal feelings about a party or race is irrelevant to accurately pegging it. If I am going to be seen as an accurate point of reference on the nature of the current election cycle, I have to put my personal feelings and passions aside. Nothing sucks more than reporting a race is running away from you, but if that's the case, that's the case.
5- Properly weight the polls within the averages, but only if necessary. A lot of guesswork is involved here, because a firm that has a great year in, say, 2008, can have a shit one in 2012 (see Rasmussen). Weighting releases in the averages solely on the track record of the company needs to account regular auditing of polling firms' findings versus results. If a pollster has had a string of bad results after a period of good ones, it's fair to include them in an average, but handicap them. If however they've had a flood of terribly off releases, eliminate them all together. Comparing polls using different kinds of electorates: likely, registered, or "all adults", is a no-no, unless you don't really have a solid quantity of all of the same kind. Lastly, weighing a poll based on the sample size makes sense, so long as the margin of error per release is also taken into account.
6- For This Midterm, Do Not Discount the "Presidential Penalty" (or "Midterm Penalty as it is more commonly known).
My frustrations with the GOP over its ability to constantly lose cannot blind me or any other observers to a demonstrable fact: the President's party never gains Senate seats in the 6th year: the average FDR and since has been a loss of 6.5. Clinton enjoyed no losses at all, Eisenhower a catastrophic 13 seat collapse, and the rest have fallen within that range. But even with the Republicans' incredible skill at losing, they are going to gain something, because history, and the numbers, say so. Harry Enten of 538 brought up this oft-overlooked phenomena on twitter this morning, and it bears more exploration. The best analysis of this, IMO, was by Robert S. Erikson way back in 1988. After exhaustively going through the data, he came to a conclusion that seems extremely generalistic, indicts our mass electorate as fickle, and is of course the only one that fits:
. At midterm, the president's party always performs poorly-even
when the president is popular and the economy is thriving. The one expla-
nation that does fit the data is that of a presidential penalty. At every mid-
term, the electorate turns against the presidential party for being the party
in power.
The sole exceptions to "every" has been extraordinary circumstances involving either explosive economic growth (199
, a perceived dramatic improvement in the economy (1934), or war-time support (2002), none of which are happening this year. This will happen this year, the question is simply how large will the Presidential penalty be.
7. Take in all good points raised by other analysts, rather than rejecting the ones you don't like.
I absorb nearly everything tweeted and written out by Harry Enten, Sean Trende, Nate Silver, and Nate Cohn, not because these people are infallible poll-parsing gods, but because...they raise good points. Take Sean Trende's recent reflection on the performance of a party's senatorial candidates in contested races in relation to the President's job approval. Or Nate Cohn's aforementioned knifing of PPP.
My goal has been to provide accurate, reliable calls. The 2012 Wisconsin Recall was a high point for me, followed just five months later with a low. I'd like to take the time to thank all of those who volunteered and contributed to the AOSHQDD throughout 2012, even on the tough night of hell in November. Lastly, I'd like to thank Ace for continuing to allow me to do my thing here, even when I screwed up royally in the last go-round. There are very, very few accurate "election gurus" on the right. I want to regain the trust of those I lost in last cycle's botch, and realize I'll have to earn it by making accurate calls.
So, here's my promise to all the loyal readers of the AOSHQ: regardless the "good" or "bad" result I am seeing, it will be projected, and as accurately as possible.
Whatever will be, will be.
Posted by: CAC at
01:50 PM
| Comments (251)
Post contains 2397 words, total size 15 kb.
Posted by: sunny-dee at January 28, 2014 01:58 PM (EBoCD)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 01:58 PM (t3UFN)
Really appreciated your hard work and the work of your cohorts! Just need a more accurate estimation of fraud.
Still remember Beckel saying it was all over for Bammy a couple of weeks before the election. What the heck happened? Certainly a tongue kiss from the Fat Man couldn't have had that much of an effect.
Posted by: Ammo Dump at January 28, 2014 02:00 PM (GgPam)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at January 28, 2014 02:00 PM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Barry O'bama at January 28, 2014 02:00 PM (l3vZN)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 28, 2014 02:01 PM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami at January 28, 2014 02:01 PM (bCEmE)
Posted by: garrett at January 28, 2014 02:01 PM (qGrlV)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at January 28, 2014 02:01 PM (+VxsD)
*hugs* Don't be so hard on yourself. The loss wasn't your fault and I'm pretty sure even if you pegged it, it wouldn't have made it hurt any less.
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 28, 2014 02:02 PM (GrtrJ)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:02 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: pep at January 28, 2014 02:03 PM (6TB1Z)
Nobody blames you for anything, darlin' . . . And, forgive me, but at first I thought, whoa, movie review?
Posted by: Peaches at January 28, 2014 02:03 PM (8lmkt)
Posted by: traye at January 28, 2014 02:03 PM (DFN2d)
Posted by: logprof at January 28, 2014 02:03 PM (X3GkB)
Posted by: Mirror-Universe Mitt Romney at January 28, 2014 02:03 PM (+VxsD)
Posted by: Dog Fucker at January 28, 2014 02:04 PM (qGrlV)
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at January 28, 2014 02:04 PM (itCai)
P.S. Fuck you, trolltard traye.Posted by: logprof at January 28, 2014 02:04 PM (X3GkB)
Posted by: traye at January 28, 2014 02:05 PM (DFN2d)
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 28, 2014 02:05 PM (GrtrJ)
Posted by: Kal Penn at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (qGrlV)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (XvHmy)
Because you are in the U.S. Navy so your vote isn't counted.
Why should they poll you?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (QFxY5)
Posted by: phreshone at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (Pr6hk)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (SY2Kh)
Polls have a way of becoming a self-fulfilling-prophecy.
That's why so many of them are skewered to produce a desired result.
If the majority of the polls show that the 'other guy' is going to win...then it can cause people to stay home and not vote.
"Why bother" they may think to themselves.
It can also work the other way:
"My guy is winning...so it won't matter if I don't vote."
CAC...as I said the other night, don't beat yourself up about this.
You did a great job.
You worked tirelessly and put forth some well thought out posts.
And I for one, appreciated it greatly.
Posted by: wheatie at January 28, 2014 02:06 PM (Wq5le)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 28, 2014 02:07 PM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 28, 2014 02:08 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: traye at January 28, 2014 02:09 PM (DFN2d)
Posted by: Sandra Fluke at January 28, 2014 02:09 PM (Hx5uv)
You hit on the single most important thing when interpreting trends....anecdote vs. data.
It's immensely difficult to block out the cacophony of intriguing, tempting, but ultimately worthless information and focus on just the statistically valid data.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 28, 2014 02:10 PM (QFxY5)
Posted by: grammie winger at January 28, 2014 02:10 PM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 28, 2014 02:10 PM (C3Wjb)
Yeah. No.
Saying that Nate Silver got it right still burns my soul shaped cavity. Maybe he was tipped off about fraud. Maybe not. But the fact is that he was right. Nothing is to be gained by ignoring that.
Also, what the hell? Taking responsibility for your actions and discussing how to improve your methodology? What are you, an intellectually honest grown up or something?
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD, you taunty bitch. at January 28, 2014 02:10 PM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: killface at January 28, 2014 02:11 PM (dr0xf)
But supporting differentiated candidates would me losing invites to the cool dinner parties in DC, NYC, Boston and LA
Posted by: phreshone at January 28, 2014 02:11 PM (Pr6hk)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:12 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: grammie winger at January 28, 2014 02:12 PM (P6QsQ)
Or decide that the purity factor was insufficient and stay home. I'm sorry, but it had to be said.
Posted by: Peaches at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (8lmkt)
I wish I could. My kids will live in a diminished country with a lower standard of living for the rest of their lives thanks to that arrogant ass. That is assuming the world doesn't incinerate itself in a nuclear holocaust brought on by his incompetence. I really think we may in be a replay of 1914 or 1939.
Or perhaps 476. I always liked the Churchill line about a new Dark Age.
"But if we fail, then the whole world...will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age... "
Posted by: pep at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: WalrusRex at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Nate Silver at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (3a584)
Posted by: Prez'nit 404 at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (Dwehj)
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 28, 2014 02:13 PM (GrtrJ)
Don't do that, it's 13 degrees below zero here. Wait til June. When it's 40 degrees.
Posted by: killface at January 28, 2014 02:14 PM (dr0xf)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:14 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:14 PM (savVp)
More fool we.
Posted by: --- at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (yz6yg)
Posted by: Dorcus Blimline at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (Loyyy)
Posted by: Mosquito from Wauwatosa at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (qGrlV)
Posted by: logprof at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (X3GkB)
Posted by: Lauren at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:15 PM (t3UFN)
(yeah, I fell off the wagon. I'll get back up there eventually but these times make it tough)
Posted by: DangerGirl at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (GrtrJ)
Posted by: JFirch at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (yIYQP)
I saw constant campaign ads for TFG on tv and only a handful for Mitt's, and those were pretty tame ads
I had a bad feeling before that it was going to turn out the way it did. Nothing scientific, just observing the public as a whole
Posted by: kbdabear at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (aTXUx)
Yeah that night sucked. I pretty much lost faith (for the first time in my life!) in the American experiment. That was why I in particular couldn't believe the polls prior, that the majority of the nation was now takers. I really doubt it had anything to do with Binders! or Dogs! or even The War on Women!
Pretty much don't care about the midterms except for the schadenboner I would get that it would upset leftists if the gop had a good night. Other than that, we live in a dictatorship, these are just show elections. And a Freedom Party is not on the ballot.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (n0DEs)
Posted by: oeJay44incday endorses Cotton Mather's Night Rider Puritan Holy War on Strumpets and Wastrels at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (QxSug)
Posted by: logprof at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (X3GkB)
Posted by: LFW - Honorary Pointy Eared Vulcan at January 28, 2014 02:16 PM (+hPIb)
Posted by: Angel with a sword at January 28, 2014 02:17 PM (hpgw1)
[pardon, I have a headache]
What time does the Obama induced self flagellation begin?
Posted by: Ronger P. D. Gnost at January 28, 2014 02:17 PM (WG3O5)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (yz6yg)
We're on a slow road to fuckedville, and all we can do is try and lean on the brakes a bit.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: mr_jack at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (TMG3G)
Posted by: Nobody at January 28, 2014 02:18 PM (hk0ja)
I realize this is a stupid sock, but I'd really like to hear which Bush screw-ups Obama has 'fixed.' Trillions blown on stimulus haven't shifted (real) unemployment, policies in the Middle East have been continued or expanded, his own lazy ass will make the case that 'income inequality' is still getting worse. Fewer people have health insurance today. Deficits are vastly worse.
Posted by: --- at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (MMC8r)
Most Obama voters knew he was lying, liked what they heard, and voted for him anyway.
Love is like that, I guess.
Posted by: jwb7605 [/i][/u][/s][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (ZALPg)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (savVp)
Posted by: Mosquito from Wauwatosa at January 28, 2014 06:15 PM (qGrlV)
================
Yer killin' me here!
Posted by: grammie winger at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (ndIek)
Posted by: garrett at January 28, 2014 02:19 PM (qGrlV)
Posted by: traye at January 28, 2014 02:20 PM (DFN2d)
Posted by: secretary of state at January 28, 2014 02:20 PM (5BK7I)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:20 PM (yz6yg)
Slouching towards Byzantium. Or perhaps Bethlehem, in what has to be one of the best bits of bleak Brit poetry.
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
Posted by: pep at January 28, 2014 02:20 PM (6TB1Z)
Of course it could also be that the LIVs in the country are so damn stupid that they were genuinely spooked that Romney was going to take away tampons let alone BC pills and strip away all aid to the poor; but the # of people who voted in Denver was way up in 2012 vs 2008 and I do not buy it as just honest election results. I just cant.
Posted by: palerider at January 28, 2014 02:20 PM (dkExz)
Posted by: Todd Wiley at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (lrkg9)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (ZPrif)
Include: The IRS tying up Tea Party grassroots, keeping them sidelined. Doesn't anybody else remember asking 'Where is the Tea Party?'
Posted by: --- at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (pginn)
Posted by: irright at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (DtNNC)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:21 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: traye at January 28, 2014 06:20 PM (DFN2d)
What the GOP is doing right now is, in military terms, "preparing strategy for the last war".
NEVER works.
Posted by: jwb7605 [/i][/u][/s][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (ZALPg)
No worries, but it is princely of you to care enough to write this. Your 2010 analysis was dead on, if I recall, predicting election results that took everyone else, especially the MSM, off guard. In 2012 we entered bizarro world. The people crowing they got it right that night will eventually get it wrong, maybe this year, maybe in 2016. Thus goes the world of polling.
Besides, the Rons/Ettes are a forgiving sort of bunch; just flash some pointy elbowed plaid maps at 'em and all will be forgotten.
Posted by: LizLem at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (BF+2f)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: GOP Brain Trust at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (nTgAI)
Posted by: Wally at January 28, 2014 02:22 PM (UQuFF)
Posted by: The Amerikan Politburo at January 28, 2014 02:23 PM (XvHmy)
Posted by: Angel with a sword at January 28, 2014 02:23 PM (hpgw1)
Posted by: Mordineus at January 28, 2014 02:23 PM (jQqYf)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 28, 2014 02:23 PM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 28, 2014 02:23 PM (RJMhd)
Posted by: flounder at January 28, 2014 02:24 PM (Kkt/i)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 28, 2014 02:24 PM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: GOP Brain Trust at January 28, 2014 02:24 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:24 PM (yz6yg)
Posted by: secretary of state at January 28, 2014 02:25 PM (5BK7I)
"Anyone can beat this guy."
"Anyone can beat Obama."
This is what pundits like Rush were saying in 2011.
Remember?
All this got us was a primary from hell...full of people who really had no chance of winning the general.
Millions of dollars were wasted on their futile campaigns.
Then, we had the Romney Borg, telling us that resistance was futile...that Romney was going to be the chosen one...and that resistance was futile.
A lot of people resented that, and were still too butthurt to vote for him.
There were a lot of factors at play in the 2012 bloodbath.
Our takeaway should be...that we should not fight amongst ourselves.
Nothing good will come of it.
Posted by: wheatie at January 28, 2014 02:25 PM (Wq5le)
Posted by: killface at January 28, 2014 06:11 PM (dr0xf)
*KOFF* ORCA *KOFF*
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD, you taunty bitch. at January 28, 2014 02:25 PM (Gk3SS)
I was volunteering with True the Vote at the Columbus OH early voting location up to election day. I still remember the day that there was an Obama campaign visit down on OSU campus, and Wil. I. Am. from Black Eyed Peas was there. The Dems had arranged for buses to take people post-event to the voting location. One of the security guards present told me that they only ended up bringing about half the buses reserved, and some of them were only half full. At that point, I thought we had a real shot if that's all they could get from an insanely liberal constituency.
Nevermind that the majority of the people coming in were violating - blatantly - the rules with their Obama tshirts and tote bags, and none of the polling officials said a word (again, race). One particular loud mouth spent nearly the entire 20min she took to vote to proclaim that Romney was a racist ass and so was everyone who voted for him. Again, no interference from polling officials (and I was not allowed to do anything as a poll observer only).
I think it was historic that, with all other things taken into consideration, Obama still won - and with that much of a margin. The low info voters seem to have finally outnumbered the informed voters, at least as it pertains to the general which is what most of them will only ever vote in.
I have some hope for 2014, but not as much as I did in 2010. As for 2016, I've already chalked it up as a loss, but I still hope I'm proved wrong.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:25 PM (01otU)
I don't think is was so much party identification but the six-pack factor- he who the average voter would rather share a six-pack with almost always wins.
Romney was and is a better man, but didn't come across as someone the squishy middle could relate to- someone who gave the impression that he understood and cared about Joe Sixpack.
That impression may have been wrong, but in politics perception is reality.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 28, 2014 02:26 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:26 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: MSO at January 28, 2014 02:26 PM (hoXzy)
Posted by: OG Celtic-American at January 28, 2014 02:26 PM (vHRtU)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:27 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Jinx the Cat at January 28, 2014 02:27 PM (l3vZN)
Posted by: Golfman in NC at January 28, 2014 02:27 PM (/djtm)
Posted by: The Obvious Sock at January 28, 2014 02:27 PM (q+zA9)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 28, 2014 02:27 PM (qbQhu)
Posted by: troyriser at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Lauren at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: logprof at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (X3GkB)
. . . . and managing to scam your way into millions by sweet talking people you meet.
So ya, if you feel guilty, vote for amnesty. It will sooth your conscience and you can keep on scamming people.
Posted by: Ronger P. D. Gnost at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (WG3O5)
I don't blame you; I blame Americans who voted for the ongoing pain. I never imagined we'd be such a stupid nation yet again. My gut, your analysis... immaterial to a nation intent upon suicide.
So, um, have a nice day.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (eHIJJ)
I want to adopt you. You come to Wisconsin. You live at my house. That is all. Posted by: grammie winger at January 28, 2014 06:10 PM (P6QsQ)
I consider CAC an honorary cheesehead for his great work on the Walker recall election and would welcome him here - but he might not want to leave sunny lala land for the frozen tundra just yet. I went outside this morning with 3 layers on under my Land's End down coat and I felt like I was wearing tissue paper.
A manly apology, CAC. Completely unneccessary as I'm concerned, but appreciated anyway.
Posted by: Donna V. at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (R3gO3)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 28, 2014 02:28 PM (DmNpO)
Posted by: --- at January 28, 2014 02:29 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: killface at January 28, 2014 06:11 PM (dr0xf)
Crippling depression is right. I still look at it as a major emotional trauma on the timeline of my life.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:29 PM (01otU)
Posted by: Rocks at January 28, 2014 02:29 PM (vR0sZ)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:29 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:29 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at January 28, 2014 02:30 PM (DmNpO)
Posted by: Golfman in NC at January 28, 2014 02:30 PM (/djtm)
Posted by: Minnfidel at January 28, 2014 02:30 PM (C3Wjb)
Posted by: palerider at January 28, 2014 06:20 PM (dkExz)
I used to be a poll worker. I'm not sure how it differs state to state, but I'd assume it's more or less the same as how we do it in NY. Basically, every poll is required to have four workers, two representing the Democrats and two for the GOP. The workers are not actually required to be members of the party they are there for, only to take an oath that they'll uphold election law. I can guaran-damn-tee you that there are many urban districts where the poll workers are all Democrat Party activists. To do what you described would be simple in such a district.
This is how such urban districts are able to come up with over 100% voter turnout, while the wealthy suburban district I worked in, full of people who are actually politically active, had far and away the largest turnout I'd ever seen in 2008, just shy of 75%.
Posted by: mugiwara at January 28, 2014 02:30 PM (3a584)
Posted by: Lauren at January 28, 2014 02:30 PM (hFL/3)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 28, 2014 02:31 PM (qbQhu)
Posted by: LizLem at January 28, 2014 06:22 PM (BF+2f)
Oh man. I would say that's not true but it is. It is in every possible way.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD, you taunty bitch. at January 28, 2014 02:31 PM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at January 28, 2014 02:31 PM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:31 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: OG Celtic-American at January 28, 2014 02:31 PM (vHRtU)
Posted by: secretary of state at January 28, 2014 02:32 PM (5BK7I)
Posted by: Planet Hillary at January 28, 2014 02:32 PM (8ojdx)
Posted by: Teleprompter Feed Crew at January 28, 2014 02:32 PM (RJMhd)
There was a person that I listened to daily that was calling it like it was. It was Stu Regiere of the Glenn Beck show. The day before the election he voiced his doubts about Romney winning. I didn't want to believe him (Neither did Glenn).
In my mind, I just couldn't imagine the American people re-electing the POS. I'm much more pessimistic now. Even for 2014. I've lost a lot of faith in this country.
Posted by: Soona at January 28, 2014 02:32 PM (AIfv5)
8. Bigger maps don't make you more right.
Seriously though. You do a great job and everyone should be thankful. I am.
Posted by: Rocks at January 28, 2014 02:33 PM (vR0sZ)
Posted by: OG Celtic-American at January 28, 2014 02:33 PM (vHRtU)
Posted by: JackStraw at January 28, 2014 02:33 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Hamilton Burger at January 28, 2014 02:33 PM (fj0N9)
Uh.
"Nobody get's outta here alive."
Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (V70Uh)
Romney kinda sucked as a candidate.
He never, ....well that is water under the bridge.
But hey a year later we got a documentary that showed he was a normal guy, not the characterachure the MSM made him to be
so we got that going for us
Posted by: The Obvious Sock at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (q+zA9)
Posted by: Sean [s]Bannion[/s] Blutarski[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (yz6yg)
Pete Seeger - a stinking Stalinist who never admitted the errors of his ways.
To honor him, Obama will order all government buildings to fly the hammer and sickle flag at half-mast for 2 weeks. (Well, no he won't - but he'd sure like to.)
I would say here comes a bunch of MSM crap about what a "man of the people" and "voice for the oppressed" Seeger was, but I doubt most of them know old Commie folksingers from the '30's from a hole in the ground.
Posted by: Donna V. at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (R3gO3)
Posted by: Perry Mason at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (O66NZ)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 28, 2014 02:34 PM (XvHmy)
If you learn from your mistakes, how come Perry Mason kicks your ass in the Preliminary Hearing?
Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Nip Sip at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (savVp)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 06:29 PM (aDwsi)
I wrote everything up in my incident reports, and at one point did as one of the judges on location if there was any process in place to stop that stuff before they entered the doors (there was security outside as well) and was told that the guards outside were trying to catch it but *shrugs* they can't catch'em all. And I think the day those buses rolled in, they didn't even try because of the number and that the folks on the bus were all high on their Obama endorphins and being obnoxious as all hell. You just knew that any attempt to 'turn that shirt inside out, ma'am' would have resulted in WHY, YOU RACIST?
In retrospect, I had forgotten about the legit racism fatigue people were feeling back in those days. We laugh about it, it still happens, but man in 2011/2012 it was literally exhausting to constantly hear racism at every damn turn.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (01otU)
How hard would it be to get more conservatives on the ground election night, helping count ballots and prevent voter fraud in key districts/counties? Efforts to exorcise the dead from rising again, and guarding against trunks of ballots, are in major order, this year and especially in 2016. I know True the Vote got smacked hard, but hopefully that is not a dissuasion.
Posted by: LizLem at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (BF+2f)
Posted by: Rocks at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (vR0sZ)
If you learn from your mistakes, how come Perry Mason kicks your ass in the Preliminary Hearing?
Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at January 28, 2014 06:35 PM (V70Uh)
Zing!
Posted by: Perry Mason at January 28, 2014 02:35 PM (O66NZ)
Posted by: soothsayer, they chanted at January 28, 2014 02:36 PM (qbQhu)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at January 28, 2014 02:36 PM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:36 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Thunderb at January 28, 2014 02:36 PM (zOTsN)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 06:35 PM (savVp)
I tried to drink my through the JEF, but can't do it.
mostly quit drinking and am now power lifting after reading the Mark Rippetoe bok Instapundit keeps plugging
Posted by: The Obvious Sock at January 28, 2014 02:37 PM (q+zA9)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:38 PM (savVp)
Posted by: Hrothgar at January 28, 2014 02:38 PM (o3MSL)
Posted by: LizLem at January 28, 2014 06:35 PM (BF+2f)
I gave money to True The Vote after reading about Catherine Englebrecht's troubles with the IRS, OSHA, the FBI, et al. I intend to give them more and take one of their poll watcher training seminars if they're still around in 2016.
Posted by: troyriser at January 28, 2014 02:38 PM (O66NZ)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:38 PM (yz6yg)
Posted by: AmericanBTGoG at January 28, 2014 02:39 PM (6DDpr)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:39 PM (savVp)
Romney had the brilliant George W. Bush-Karl Rove Winning Formula of never defending yourself, never attacking your opponent, never exposing your opponent's lies, and never simply telling the truth and letting the cards fall where they may.
"No-no-no! We'll let history decide!"
And in the meantime, those of us who aren't multimillionaires get fucked.
Even today, Romeny says Candy Crowley "Made a mistake" by helping Obama win the second debate. A MISTAKE?! It was deliberate sabotage. Romney might be a good man, but he's a rotten politician who puts his gentlemanly manners ahead of MY welfare.
I just heard Barbara Bush praising Bil Clinton, saying she loves him.
The GOP needs to start running people who really want the job and who don't love Democrats. Ace called McCain months before the election: He wanted to "lose with honor" as a big "Fuck you!" to his daddy.
Romney didn't want to be mean to the First Black President or Candy Crowley or any other leftist who might not like him. He also didn't want to outdo his own father, a failed presidential candidate.
So he lost. And he deserved to lose. We need Curtis LeMay, someone who comes right out and says, "We're going to win by destroying the other side." Someone who WANTS victory.
Until we have that person, the Republicans will continue to lose.
Posted by: Tacky Adhesive at January 28, 2014 02:39 PM (OyZVN)
Posted by: secretary of state at January 28, 2014 06:32 PM (5BK7I)
Oh yeah, I had forgotten about that. They lived nearby, tons in that Cooke Rd, Morse Rd area.
Even the Republican judge on site didn't seem happy to have poll observers there. We didn't identify ourselves as being from True the Vote, just showed our paper from the county. Honestly, the Democrat judge was way nicer to deal with. Of course he was happy.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:40 PM (01otU)
Posted by: Nip Sip at January 28, 2014 02:40 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:41 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: awkward davies at January 28, 2014 02:41 PM (WK8VM)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 02:42 PM (aDwsi)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:42 PM (savVp)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at January 28, 2014 06:36 PM (aDwsi)
I can't do that. When I try, I lose control. Absolutely, red in the face, homicidal, out of control. I have to pretend they don't exist. Unless I manage a really good zinger, and then they try to strangle me!
...and that's when the fight started, no actually it was a riot.(Police were called, made the evening news.)
Posted by: Ronger P. D. Gnost at January 28, 2014 02:42 PM (WG3O5)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:43 PM (yz6yg)
The only people who matter are the swing voters. Confronting leftists will do absolutely nothing except make YOU stupider.
In 2012, the swing voters went for Obama because they thought Romney was a "vulture capitalist," a characterization the Romney camp did NOTHING to dispel.
Romney refused to let any of his charitable work be known, and he never recovered from the "47 percent" remark.
Talking to leftists would've made no difference. Obama didn't win; Romney lost.
Posted by: Tacky Adhesive at January 28, 2014 02:43 PM (OyZVN)
...and that's when the fight started, no actually it was a riot.(Police were called, made the evening news.)
Posted by: Ronger P. D. Gnost at January 28, 2014 06:42 PM (WG3O5)
If one wanders into Democratic Underground territory, they will walk away certifiably dumber. That place? I can't even. It's like the 9th level of liberal hell.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:43 PM (01otU)
Posted by: naturalfake at January 28, 2014 02:44 PM (0cMkb)
I signed up to work on election day, downloaded some shit on my phone, and never got a call. I followed up and the software didn't work.
But I still thought Romney was going to win.
I am embarrassed that I didn't see these small but obvious signs as something indicative of massive problems.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 28, 2014 02:44 PM (QFxY5)
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at January 28, 2014 02:44 PM (pginn)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at January 28, 2014 02:44 PM (HVff2)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:45 PM (yz6yg)
The script goes that a "moderate, electable" candidate is picked by the RNC to be Hillary's punching bag.
Benghazi? Youtube video! What difference does it make!
IRS? Oh, just cons whining about having to follow tax laws
Hillary is old? The MSM will have her botoxed, made up, and photoshopped to the point where she'll look younger than Chelsea
The script is written, only insurgents taking over the GOP can alter it
Posted by: kbdabear at January 28, 2014 02:45 PM (aTXUx)
Posted by: Heinrich H at January 28, 2014 02:45 PM (3sZO1)
Posted by: secretary of state at January 28, 2014 02:45 PM (5BK7I)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 02:45 PM (3sZO1)
Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at January 28, 2014 02:46 PM (savVp)
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at January 28, 2014 02:46 PM (yz6yg)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 28, 2014 06:44 PM
I remember you talking about that. That alone didn't convince me, it was the accumulation of things like that which gave me a really bad feeling.
Posted by: kbdabear at January 28, 2014 02:48 PM (aTXUx)
But the only question that really mattered went to TFG by a landslide;
"Cares about people like me"
All the whiteboards and position papers in the world won't overcome that kind of infantile thinking
Posted by: kbdabear at January 28, 2014 02:51 PM (aTXUx)
We need snow here, any kind, pass it through USB port plz! I'm in one of the few areas of the country not buried in it, or in deep freeze cold. The inversion we naturally get this time of year traps pollution, and without snowstorms it just hovers in the valleys like steam in a covered pot. State legislature is back in session this week, and air quality is gonna be a major issue on their agenda. I'm afraid they will vote in draconian San Francisco type laws just to try to shut people up about it, and it still won't do any good, but hey at least they tried to do something! Meh.
Posted by: LizLem at January 28, 2014 02:53 PM (BF+2f)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 02:54 PM (3sZO1)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 06:54 PM (3sZO1)
They're not really black, though. Uncle Toms and shit. Let's be real.
Posted by: tdpwells at January 28, 2014 02:55 PM (01otU)
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at January 28, 2014 02:57 PM (pginn)
Posted by: RWC at January 28, 2014 02:58 PM (Q6HBD)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 02:58 PM (3sZO1)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 28, 2014 06:44 PM (QFxY5)
Yep. I called the Romney people 3 times beginning in October and left a VM message. They never called back. I called a 4th time and finally spoke to a living person. When I showed up, they acted surprised to see me and it took them forever to set me up with a phone and a script.
Like you said, at the time, these things seem small and you don't want to think badly of people on your side but after the election, I thought "they didn't seem terribly well-organized, did they?"
It's funny - the GOP, the business people, the practical ones, can't run an effective campaign. The Dems - the people who came up with the clusterfuck known as Obamacare - run campaigns that are as smooth as a Swiss watch. I'll bet if I had called the Obama campaign to volunteer, I would have been contacted immediately.
Posted by: Donna V. at January 28, 2014 02:59 PM (R3gO3)
Posted by: Beagle at January 28, 2014 03:00 PM (sOtz/)
I followed your analysis along with Michael Barone, Nate Silver, Sean Trende, Jim Geraighty, and a few others. You did fine--you were much closer than the Literary Digest polling fiasco of 1936.
First, there was a real question whether blacks, single women, hispanics, college students, etc. would turn out at the same rate as 2008. Some polls such as Rassmussen and Gallup assumed that they would not due to the economy, 2010 Midterms, lesser enthusiasm for Dems vs. Repubs. etc.. Others such as PPP, Most Media polls, etc, assumed that their turnout would nearly match 2008. Thus, we see the average reflect a bimodal distribution which happens when some pollsters underlying assumptions are wrong (the GOP skew if you will).
2012 Answer was not 2008 levels but much more than Gallup and Rassmussen assumed. Note, Romney's internal polling was also following Gallup, etc. and posited that he had somewhat of a chance.
One of the things that has changed is extensive early and absentee voting has changed the game and I am not sure exactly how pollsters are adjusting for this on a state by state level. For example, if the election had been run according to say 1996's stricter rules, LIV turnout that favored Obama would probably be somewhat lower.
Last, but not least, I believe that Obama's information machine that targeted voters probably also gave them even better feedback in real time in early voting trends. Romney, on the other hand, ran a very cautious campaign because his polling indicated that it was a close race and a mistake would sink him. If McInturff (Romney's pollster) had been competent at his job, then Romney probably would have swung for the fences in Sept. and early Oct. Instead, Romney played conservatively and lost probably his only chance to change the dynamics. I am too lazy to look it up but I remember coverage of states such as Virginia where a significant proportion of the population had already voted before Election night. Repubs are going to have to revise their media strategies, go back to GOTV at the local level, and persuade the downwardly mobile 2004 GWB voters like in Ohio and other midwestern states to turnout again. One such way is nationalism in trade and national sovereignty over borders.
Unfortunately, , polling for midterms is much more dicey. In wave elections such as 1980, 1994, 2006 and 2010, polling often understates the underlying dynamic. Sixth years are particularly brutal (Clinton got lucky in 1998 because Americans got bored with the impeachment and bought the WH line that it was about sex). Absent impeaching Obama or destroying their base in a futile sellout on immigration amnesty, Republicans will probably do better than current polling suggests.
Posted by: wg at January 28, 2014 03:02 PM (pdceH)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 03:03 PM (3sZO1)
We were thus fucked by the lofos and the smart, scheming and moral free team (aided, of course, by the cockholsters in the media) behind TehWon in defining and imprinting the dog hating Ritchie Rich 1%er Mitt for the lofos and independents. I would also add that the "principled" conservatives that bashed him 24/7 which (like Hannity and Ingraham did for McCain) also depressed voter, especially GOP, turnout, to the tune of 8 million voters. ~sigh~
Posted by: eureka! at January 28, 2014 03:04 PM (xiXna)
Posted by: Hurricane LaFawnduh at January 28, 2014 03:04 PM (pginn)
Posted by: Bill H at January 28, 2014 03:08 PM (3sZO1)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at January 28, 2014 03:17 PM (fT3qO)
I know you took the elections seriously and have felt terrible about it. I am sorry and won't belittle or excuse that. You have however, IMO, been much too hard on yourself. I know if you will make corrections for the future. No matter what you predicted, there was no way I was going to be swayed from my belief that the SCOAMF was out (and I'm a tech guy who lives/dies by the data.) To this day, it is incredible to me that Romney lost, but he did. The difference between you and me is that in the future you will be willing to accept the incredible truth when it is known.
Posted by: dogfish at January 28, 2014 03:21 PM (nsOJa)
Posted by: Barbara at January 28, 2014 03:25 PM (73mB5)
Posted by: ObjectionSustained at January 28, 2014 03:37 PM (fT3PS)
The fact that this country elected the devil (but Precedent!) they didn't know over the devil they knew (McCain, the man bred and born to be President) was bad enough. The fact that a damn decent guy like Romney who has succeeded at every thing he touched got beat after we knew just how weak Historic First was shocking.
But not your fault.
Posted by: scottst at January 28, 2014 03:47 PM (IX7iP)
Posted by: jewells45 trying to keep from going crazy at January 28, 2014 03:50 PM (/IQip)
I know it's easy for me to say, but don't get too down on yourself. I didn't believe Obama could possibly get re-elected, and I was sure as hell disgusted when he did. But you provided a valuable service nonetheless, and we all learned some painful lessons last year.
But the key thing is to learn from that and get better. I have no doubt you will.
And nothing is ever written in stone,,,,
Posted by: Tex Lovera at January 28, 2014 04:19 PM (2O8+m)
CAC, I remember castigating you on election day when you declared that Ohio would go for Obama. Despite that you were calling the election for Romney, I simply didn't believe a Romney victory was going to happen without Ohio. - And so your projection greatly disheartened me; and I resented you for it.
I felt bad afterward (mostly because I had a seriously vicious fucking hangover).
I realized there must be incredible (though perhaps subtle) psychological pressure to vindicate and validate the political reality that we, your audience/peers, desperately wished to come to pass. If your projections rubbed this wishful thinking the wrong way, then your projections were worthless! So, even though I doubt my castigation was noticed, I feel I owe you an apology. Sorry about that.
Anyway, sure you screwed up the 2012 election call - along with countless other prognosticators whom we still respect. Michael Barone, for instance.
I actually don't think you did a bad job. You got it wrong, but that doesn't mean you did a bad job.
Hell, you called Ohio right.
I look forward to your next set of predictions - and calibrating my wishful thinking appropriately.
Posted by: _Dave_ at January 28, 2014 04:24 PM (07UzX)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at January 28, 2014 04:36 PM (E8IHS)
I'm a poll worker in the Absentee precinct. We count all the absentee votes, the early votes, and the email and military ballots. We are *always* laboring away for hours and hours after the polls close. That night, I didn't get home until 4am Wednesday morning, a 23-hour day. When Romney conceded, the Democrat counters erupted into cheers and took a good long break as they pounded each other on the back. Finishing the job that night took everything I had. I don't know when I've been more devastated, and I don't know that I've really recovered. I resent each and every motherfucker that voted for this jackass with a red-hot bitterness that just won't go away.
Posted by: WaitingForMartel at January 28, 2014 04:49 PM (wL/sZ)
Posted by: Emily at January 28, 2014 04:52 PM (7Rn+/)
You only suffered from the same desperate hope as the rest of us did. When you have a deadly disease you tend to place great hope in any possible cure.
It happens.
I'm sure you will do everything you say and good on you for it. No apology was necessary.
Cheers
Posted by: MK at January 28, 2014 04:58 PM (fxm3x)
Posted by: CAC at January 28, 2014 04:58 PM (ZDMhT)
Posted by: L, elle at January 28, 2014 05:15 PM (0xqKe)
Posted by: Mongerel at January 28, 2014 05:16 PM (YqWfw)
Posted by: Facts at January 28, 2014 05:31 PM (KOp/H)
Posted by: Facts at January 28, 2014 05:54 PM (KOp/H)
Posted by: sexypig at January 28, 2014 07:22 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: Fact back at January 28, 2014 07:34 PM (8J4DB)
Just read what Nate Silver is saying if you want accurate info
Posted by: tom at January 28, 2014 08:44 PM (woPAm)
Posted by: evergreen at January 28, 2014 08:54 PM (jiviO)
I was guilty of misreading the tea leaves, relying on personal feelings, nonsense like the lawn sign counts, etc. But it was easy to do...I remember that Romney was drawing huge crowds to his rallies, while Obama was struggling to fill high school gyms. Fluke drew 10 people to an event. Etc, etc.
Looking back, though, one thing should have worried me. It's extremely anecdotal, but....I was chatting with a good friend one night. He's a good guy, solid family man, and we never talk politics. However, I brought up Romney, and the guy asked me how I could vote for such a religious freak. I was puzzled until the guy attributed Akin's rape quote to Romney. I couldn't convince him otherwise, and I'm guessing that this guy wasn't the only one who thought this. LIV in action, I suppose.
I'll never take the MFM lightly again.
Posted by: Biff Boffo at January 28, 2014 10:38 PM (1j9qS)
Very late as usual, but wanted to add my voice in asking you not to beat yourself up.
The best way I can recall my reaction is that it was the same feel I have now, and have had, many, many times: Doesn't matter what the issue, doesn't matter what logic and intellect tells you ought to happen. The country is moving ever leftward, dominated by LIVs, hard core leftists, parasite constituencies, and pop culture. Obamacare, Roberts finding a twisted way to validate Obamacare, the reelection of TFG, TFG skating on Benghazi and several other scandals that could have brought down an R, Hilary's skating on Benghazi. On and on.
And now, when R's have the first advantage they have had in years with the Obamacare debacle: " Hey, let's not work on repealing Obamacare, instead, lehhhhht's focus onnnn - Immigration Reform!"
Tough night for everyone, CAC. Many more to come. Hang in, and thanks for saying something, even though it isn't neccessary. We value what you do. And nice job with Wiserbud on the radio last weekend.
Posted by: RM at January 29, 2014 03:53 AM (fRppw)
Posted by: SnowSun at January 29, 2014 06:15 AM (Wxdhz)
I believed Mitt had a shot, even up to their counting the results, but I felt it would be an early night. I was tracking the results coming in from Florida, and Mitt just couldn't get into the lead ... with heavily democratic counties in the southeast not reporting their results.
Once he didn't break it, I knew it was over.
I was devastated ... because I always figured Obama would be a one-term president and the country would come to its senses. It won't. The country has fundamentally changed. Obama didn't transform -- he represents a transformation that's already happened.
Posted by: ibbill at January 29, 2014 07:00 AM (ziRs9)
Posted by: Scar face at January 29, 2014 12:23 PM (8esY+)
You know, IÂ’ve been thinking about the polls and results for the last 14 months or so. Almost without exception-in the past- when state polls have diverged from national polls before the election, the state polls usually shifted towards the national average come election night. That is why so many astute political observers thought that Romney was likely to win. That is the reason why a guy like Barone, who knows more about the political machinery than I ever will said that Romney was likely to win. This was based on older methodology, I suspect, such as land line phone contacts. Or maybe something else; I donÂ’t know. Yet while Barone and others predicted that the state polls-and therefore the election- would swing in the direction of the national polls on election day, they failed to do so. Someone such as Nate Silver was therefore able to, using his handy Excel spreadsheet, correctly predict the results. Hell, IÂ’ve got a Monte Carlo tool that could have done the same thing. ItÂ’s essentially brainless work.
So what really happened? I’m not suggesting that the election was stolen (although I find the results of certain precincts in a few of the swing states to be, um, more than a little suspicious). However, I am suggesting that perhaps in this technological era, when many have permanently abandoned landlines, it might be time for a new paradigm in polling. Obviously some people figured it out okay; look at the results. But I’m still trying to wrap me head around the divergence between state and national polls that occurred in 2012. And why so many smart analysts (this doesn’t not include Dick Morris) were fooled. If memory serves, Intrade was actually predicting a Romney win when Silver was predicting a 70% chance of Obama winning. This was before Obama was painted as a saint for simply saying, “Gee, hurricane damage sucks, huh?”.
I do suspect that whatever caused that divergence has been identified and corrected. A few election cycles hence there will be some other unidentified cockup that will throw off a lot of people and will have to be fixed.
I will admit to having thought that Obama would likely win going into election day due in large part to how his response to the big storm hitting NY was portrayed. When I saw how long it was taking for NC to get called for Romney, I knew that the night was lost. If the national polls had been accurate, NC would have been called almost as quickly as Indiana.
Posted by: physics geek at January 29, 2014 12:32 PM (MT22W)
But having seen about the worst that can be seen, I think we can use an "accurate" picture going forward. I use the quotes not to cast aspersions on your ability to analyze data, but to highlight one point I diverge from you on. Because I've worked in a polling place and I've seen some of the many ways, from bringing in twenty absentee ballots and stuffing the box, to directing voters to a provisional ballot because SOMEONE has already voted in their name, that Democrats steal and fudge.
Consequently, while I don't know what the real numbers are, I know the results aren't them. Not that this matters, because we need to win the fixed game to advance. That's where you guys come in. I do think polls give a rough approximation of how much the Democrats can cheat, if purely by coincidence. The polls, precisely because they are questionable, are a pretty good dry run for dealing with the shenanigans I've seen in my district, plus buses of paid Democratic voters, ranks of dead voters, and activist multiple-voters. The correlations weren't perfect, even with large data samples, because they reflect different underlying phenomena. But the polls are a sparring partner by which we can estimate: are we beyond the margin of fraud?
Keep up the good work. Better you than me.
Posted by: Bill Reader at January 29, 2014 03:50 PM (wofKE)
Or let's talk about the GOP poll watchers getting booted out in Philly for a couple of hours. Or 100+% returns in one county in Florida.
Yeah, I know bullshit is happening. I just don't know how to stop it. I'm all ears, if anyone has some legitimate ideas.
Posted by: Physics Geek at January 29, 2014 08:07 PM (llWHs)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3224 seconds, 379 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: garrett at January 28, 2014 01:57 PM (qGrlV)