Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

THE MATH Daily Widget – Thursday, May 29 – Wigand +0.74 – Total -13.70

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 06:39 AM
Original message
THE MATH Daily Widget – Thursday, May 29 – Wigand +0.74 – Total -13.70
THE MATH Daily Widget – Thursday, May 29 – Wigand +0.74 – Total -13.70








Iowa's big jump yesterday on Intrade must have gotten someone's attention. Since yesterday, an increasing amount of money has been placed on McCain to win in 8 of our 12 swing states. Could it be someone with money is paying attention to our widget? Iowa loses half of yesterday's gain, while North Carolina grabs even more blue ground.

Yesterday’s Widget
Full Weekly Tracking
Past editions of THE MATH

What is this? THE MATH’s Daily Widget was created to track multiple daily sources which measure the potential success of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Projected Electoral Votes are on a scale of 0 to 538, with 270 being a majority, or projected win. Trading and Averages are on a scale of 0 to 100, with 50.1 being a majority, or projected win.

The Wigand Electoral Average uses public polling results to determine base states for both parties and a short list of swing states, and combines the actual electoral votes from base states with a weighted Intrade calculation for electoral votes from swing states to derive an average on a scale of 0 to 100. On this scale, greater than 50.00 is considered a win for Barack Obama. An average of 50.10 would yield 270 electoral votes, and an average of 100.00 would yield 538 electoral votes. More Information

* * * * * * *

TRACKING











* * * * * * *








Sources:
FiveThirtyEight.com
Electoral-Vote.com
Intrade
RCP Average





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fight4my3sons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. happy to k&r
that is interesting about Iowa...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 06:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Iowa still remains the bluest of our swing states ...
... so at least that's good news.

Thanks f4m3s! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
2. k& r!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting read on 538.com ... Which candidate is attacked the most?
From 538.com:

Incoming!

It's hard to come up with an objective measure of which candidates are being attacked the most, but this ought to be a reasonably interesting proxy.

I looked at the press releases from five sources: the Clinton campaign, the Obama campaign, the McCain campaign, the RNC, and the DNC, and counted the number of times that McCain, Clinton or Obama was mentioned in the headline of the press release. (For Obama press releases, which tend to have vague headlines like "Barack Obama Statement on Iran", I also counted hits in the press release abstract). Then I sorted the hits by the month of the campaign from September onward.

These figures were tallied by hand and so may be slightly imprecise, but you should certainly get the general idea. Also, this should be obvious, but the idea was to account for attacks only, so I didn't count instances in which say a DNC press release mentioned Clinton, or a McCain release mentioned McCain himself.




Read more: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/incoming.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fight4my3sons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. That article doesn't surprise me.
The observation part where it breaks it all down is a really good. Nice find. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yup ... here's the text of their observation for others
I'm impressed with their website. It's become a daily read for me.

From 538.com:

Observations:

1. It's manifest that the big break in the Democratic campaign came in February. Obama took just 10 incoming hits in January, but 51 in February, as both the RNC and the Clinton campaign significantly ramped up their efforts against him.

2. Clinton's incoming hits peaked in January, and have since dwindled basically to nothing. She hasn't been the subject of either an RNC or a McCain press release since March. Overall, since March 1st, Obama has taken 151 incoming hits, McCain has taken 144, and Clinton has taken 9.

3. The Obama campaign does very, very little attacking (quite possibly too little), at least in the form of press releases. That doesn't mean that they won't go negative, but they prefer to wait for an opportunity to counter-punch and/or to do so somewhat surreptitiously. But what they won't usually do is to try and dictate the course of a news cycle with an attack.

4. In contrast, the Clinton press shop is always operating at a fever pitch, and much of that involves attacking their opponents. During March and April, the Clinton press shop was hitting Obama nearly once a day. But the Clinton campaign has also delivered considerably more hits on McCain than the Obama campaign has (at least through its press releases). Also, note that Clinton has considerably cut down on her hits on Obama for the past several weeks.


Read more: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/incoming.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fight4my3sons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. thanks!
I am just not computer savvy enough to figure out the codes when I post. Probably why I don't do many ops :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
8. Interesting and it is proving the WEA to be as useful as we hoped.
My worry was that it wasn't going to have the day to day liquidity similar to the financial markets.

This is exactly what we hoped it would do - bring us to focus on places that are being 'hot polled' and put us ahead of the curve.

Senator Obama and McCain's dualing in Western States also proves, I think, that our choosing a wider geographic pick of swing states than the 'usual suspects' is also a good foreshadowing of the campaign.

If the Wigand Index is a good predictor of campaign activity you might see a southern swing including the Carolinas because the market there is so low and a likely place to move numbers up.

The state that has the potential for having the biggest symbolic impact on the campaign?

Arizona - McCain is just over 50% I wonder what Barr's campaign might have in Arizona - 5 points off McCain would put it into play.




Questions)
1)By the way why are increases in Obama's intrade numbers shown as negative?

2)Is Indiana now blue?
For the first time Obama is polling the same in Indiana and winning Indiana
http://www.pollster.com/08-IN-Pres-GE-MvO.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. when you get back
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phrigndumass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Apologies ... long day at the office
Quick answer to your two questions first ...
1) Those aren't increases for Obama, those are decreases. They should be negative. None of our swing states switched sides, though.
2) I need to pay closer attention to my map! hehe ... Indiana should be colored blue at the moment.

Interesting about Barr in Arizona. I'd love to see what the polls dig up, and how Barr trades on Intrade. A five-point decrease for McCain could swing the state!

You're right about choosing a wide geographic for swing states. It'll help us measure Obama's success regionally. I wonder whose idea that was? (hint: grantcart) :7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-30-08 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Barr is not up on Intrade - and I suspect he wont be.
Would have to be a seriously deranged person to think that he would win.

They might put him up on % targets or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-30-08 03:21 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Office? there is no work here lol
lol I got the columns reversed lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-29-08 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
9. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-30-08 03:05 AM
Response to Original message
12. K/R - What made the Wigand move up, Phrig? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-30-08 03:21 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. The 8 swing states that went down - only 3 went up and one was static
Of the other 38 states none changed from red to blue or vice versa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC