Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

highplainsdem

(49,029 posts)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 10:58 PM Aug 2012

Nate Silver: Aug. 16: Why I’m Not Buying the Romney Rally

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/16/aug-16-why-im-not-buying-the-romney-rally/

At the political futures market Intrade, shares in Mitt Romney have been a hot commodity this week. As of early Thursday evening, the bettors there gave Mr. Romney a 43.5 percent chance of winning November’s election. That’s up from about 39 percent late last week, before Mr. Romney’s announcement that Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin would be his running mate.

Our forecast model has usually been more bearish on Mr. Romney’s chances than Intrade — but it also shows him gaining ground over the past several days. It now gives him a 31.3 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, up from 26.7 percent late last week.

-snip-

What if we did include a vice-presidential bounce adjustment?

If so, it would probably be calculated as follows: since the average vice-presidential announcement has produced a four-point bounce in the polls, subtract four points from any poll conducted in between the naming of the running mate and the party convention. In order words, we’d subtract four points from Mr. Romney’s numbers in any poll conducted since he named Mr. Ryan on Saturday.

If I do that and run the model again, it has a rather pessimistic forecast for Mr. Romney — giving him just a 24 percent chance of winning the Electoral College, rather than 31.3 percent as in the official version.
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

unblock

(52,309 posts)
3. i still think silver misses the key aspect to the pick, and the change in times -- the money factor.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:16 PM
Aug 2012

the vice-presidential pick has historically been of trivial significance in terms of impact on the election.
and as the vice-presidential nominee per se, ryan will indeed have trivial significance in terms of such impact.

however, as the number two person on the rmoney fund-raising team, he's likely to have a rather large impact (although, fortunately, he's likely to have a favorable impact for the obama team as well!)

if he sways nobody's vote directly, he can still have a significant impact on rmoney's chances by brining in additional campaign loot.

i can't really fault silver for not addressing this concern, because his business is stuck relying on historical data and historical results to inform his model. it's not at all easy to quantify the impact of the changing rules of the game that make money so much more important than in the past.

AndyTiedye

(23,500 posts)
12. If they Can Steal FL, OH, and PA, they "Win"
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 12:55 AM
Aug 2012

We can't beat them if they lock up those three states.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
4. Everyone trying
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:22 PM
Aug 2012

to create the impression that there is a rally acknowledges that there isn't one.

CNN:

While the CNN poll suggests the Ryan announcement barely moved the needle in his home state, the news shouldn't come as surprise.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/16/cnn-electoral-map-wisconsin-moves-to-true-toss-up/


Gallup: Reaction to Ryan as VP Pick Among Least Positive Historically
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10021127192

Ryan is dead weight, and it will only get worse.

Lex

(34,108 posts)
6. The corporate media wants to push a neck-in-neck race
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:26 PM
Aug 2012

whether there is one or not. I am not saying I'm not going to work hard to get Obama re-elected, but the media wants to push this breathless narrative about how it's so very close.



 

Laura PourMeADrink

(42,770 posts)
5. Not sure I understand his theory. Is it that a bounce is only temporary? And, he will
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:24 PM
Aug 2012

be down the typical 4 soon? I don't get it

Lex

(34,108 posts)
7. I think VP selections are only a temporary bump historically, kind of like the bump
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:28 PM
Aug 2012

after the party's convention. It evens back out, iirc.

 

Laura PourMeADrink

(42,770 posts)
14. Yes, understand that. But Nate was saying deduct 4 from Romney's numbers. This
Fri Aug 17, 2012, 10:40 PM
Aug 2012

is what doesn't make sense. A bounce goes away..true. But you only lose what you gained. 1 for him. Relating a bounce of 4 (in terms of losing it) has nothing to do with him. they are mutually exclusive

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Nate Silver: Aug. 16: Why...