day

Barack Obama has this morning inched back over having a 50% chance of winning according to intrade.net.

Interesting contiguous sentences on the Rasmussen Reports website:

McCain leads 58% to 38% among those who regularly shop at Wal-Mart while Obama leads 61% to 36% among those who don’t frequent the retail giant. Overall, Obama leads among those who earn less than $40,000 a year while McCain leads among those with higher earnings.

P.S.: Regarding my vow that I will exercise 200 days this year or donate $25/day to the George W. Bush Presidential Library, do not confuse a lack of updates with a lack of progress. Today was day 151, which puts me 7 or so days ahead of pace.

P.S.-P.S.: Intrade is running a state-by-state map that now has the markets predicting the scenario I personally think is most likely, which is All Kerry States + Iowa + Colorado + New Mexico for Obama. This wins, right? 273-265? Intrade says this is a 273-265 win for McCain instead. I think this has to be a mistake, or they have a Kerry state going for McCain and I’m not seeing it.

Author: jeremy

I am the Ethel and John Lindgren Professor of Sociology and a Faculty Fellow in the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University.

9 thoughts on “day”

  1. You are right and Intrade.net seems to be showing that garbage in -> garbage out. They also are abbreviating Iowa as IO instead of the postal IA.

    I think the map is plausible otherwise, though fivethirtyeight.com isn’t handing over CO just yet, and PA, MI, NH and NM are all contestable.

    What does worry me a bit is that David Plouffe juse e-mailed me to say that they’re going to spend $39M in Florida instead of, say, Virginia where they have a much better shot.

    Like

  2. I’m not sure that the Obama’s campaign is to win Florida as much as make McCain’s campaign spend money there – like Bush/Cheney did for Hawaii in 2004. By forcing a contest in Florida, where the GOP absolutely needs a win in order to have a chance at this election, it frees up Obama to compete in a couple of much closer elections (particularly Colorado, New Mexico, Michigan, New Hampshire, and Ohio) and forcing McCain to pick his battles in those states. The added bonus comes if the Obama campaign makes it close there, then the McCain campaign is going to feel even more pressure to hold onto it, thus spending more money giving an even larger edge to Obama in the other five states.

    It’s nice having the financial advantage for a change.

    Like

  3. I’ve soured on Five Thirty Eight. I think they people who run it have become more interested in traveling around and being mini-media stars (attractive things, I admit) to making accurate projections.

    I believe intrade is underestimating Obama’s chances of me winning, but can’t decide if that belief emanates from analytic-me or wishful-me.

    Like

  4. i was confused by the seeming difference on the map and the totals too, then i read the “info” tab and realized they have two different tallying mechanisms and the default appears to be “average”:

    Leaning allots each state’s electoral votes fully to the current market leader.
    Average allots each state’s votes in a weighting as determined by the market prices.

    The example it gives is WI, where a D60-40R would meaning leaning gives all 10 to Obama, where average gives 6 to Obama and 4 to McCain.

    “Average” gives the McCain result you (and i) were puzzled by, while “Leaning” gives the total you calculated.

    Like

  5. Is anyone else afraid that it doesn’t so much matter how everyone votes in November, as it does how fair and accurate the election actually is? I mean, the polls also said Kerry was winning last time…I’m just saying.

    Go ahead an accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist. I’m not saying the GOP actually succeeded in single-handedly stealing both of the last two presidential terms through massive, organized election fraud, but there’s pretty damn good evidence that they at least tried.

    Like

  6. Quiz: If (a) McCain leads among Wal-Mart shoppers but Obama leads among those with lower incomes, and (b) people with lower incomes are more likely to shop at Wal-Mart, then:

    a. Wal-Mart has good deals on Obama-is-a-Muslim paraphernalia
    b. As free-thinkers, independents and undecided voters are more likely to shop at Wal-Mart
    c. The ecological fallacy is fueled by global warming
    d. All polls are lies

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.