Posted on | October 22, 2012 | 18 Comments
As they say, the plural of “anecdote” is data, and these are just a couple of points on the scatter-chart which are beginning to form into a clear pattern that looks a lot like an Obama meltdown. Democrats don’t want to admit this, of course, and Nate Silver is a Democrat, which is the only plausible explanation for why the Magical Forecasting Model™ still gives 2-to-1 odds for Obama.
This creates a serious problem for Nate, who now has only 15 days to walk that back. If he were to shift one net point per day from now until Nov. 6, the Magical Forecasting Model™ would have it at Obama 52.6%-Romney47.4% on Election Day. Yet insofar as Silver’s predictions are a proxy for the popular vote, there is an increasing likelihood that the Magical Forecasting Model™ would have it bass-ackward: Romney now leads the RCP average, and is ahead by 2 points in the latest Battleground Poll, to say nothing of Romney’s 7-point lead in Gallup.
Something else: Look again at Real Clear Politics, and you notice that the last time a national poll showed Obama at 50% or better was a CNN poll taken Sept. 28-30.
When an incumbent president has been below 50 percent throughout October, on what factual basis does Nate Silver justify the persistent advantage for Obama in his Magical Forecasting Model™?
Even if you think Obama could still pull out a narrow win — and the cable news networks now seem to feel obligated to feature hourly showings of Electoral College map scenarios to that effect — the precise 67.6% chance offered by Nate Silver is absurd. So unless there is some game-changing event in Obama’s favor over the next two weeks, Silver’s probably going to be hard-pressed to shift the odds toward Romney quickly enough to be “right.”
Whistling past graveyards is not science, Nate, and the aroma of bovine excrement is not perfume.
Quinnipiac has Obama up 5 points in Ohio, but Quinnipiac is the same outfit that had Obama up 10 points in Ohio — an absolute absurdity — a month ago. Even stipulating the bogusness of Quinnipiac’s D+9 sample, however, Mitt has gained 5 points in Ohio according to them, while the Democrat polling firm, PPP, shows Romney gaining four points since their previous Ohio survey.
If Romney has gained either 5 points in a month (Quinnipiac) or 4 points in a week (PPP) in what everyone acknowledges to be the most crucial swing state, exactly how the hell does Nate Silver justify his Charlie Sheen pose? #Winning!
Here’s something else for you, Nate: Why does the Battleground poll (which you consider reputable) now show the exact same margin, 49-47 as the Rasmussen poll, which you consider so unreliable? Is it possible that Rasmussen’s methodology is actually providing a more accurate measurement of public opinion than your Magical Forecasting Model™ had hitherto acknowledged?
Tonight’s debate is about foreign policy. When CBS News (not exactly a right-wing outfit) is all over the bungle in Benghazi, and the president’s spokeswoman is compelled to deny that the death of a U.S. ambassador is a policy failure, excuse me for suspecting that tonight won’t be an easy win for Obama. Yeah, maybe the talking heads on MSNBC will score it a “win” for President Gutsy Call, but what about those patriotic red-blooded American swing voters in Ohio? Probably not so much.
The dots are beginning to form a pattern, as I say, and the Graveyard Whistling Choir can ignore the pattern only at peril of their credibility. Is there a phrase for this? I think we know:
Public-opinion polls are lagging indicators in politics. By the time a shift in the trend becomes clear from poll data, the causes of the shift are days or weeks in the past. It is therefore unwise to extrapolate the current trend forward or to begin thinking of polls as supernatural prophecies that predict future events.
With all those caveats in mind, however, Mitt Romney enters the final two weeks of the presidential campaign looking very much like the next president of the United States, and it is not merely poll data that creates this impression. President Obama’s own campaign has begun to emit clear signals that the incumbent’s re-election prospects are dwindling, and anecdotal evidence of strong Republican momentum is not hard to find these days. We cannot predict what will happen in tonight’s third and final presidential debate (9 p.m. ET at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida), but it is a fairly safe guess it won’t have the game-changing impact of the first debate on Oct. 3, one of two apparent pivot points that triggered Obama’s downward slide. While the impact of Romney’s one-sided victory over a listless Obama in Denver has been universally acknowledged, it would be wrong to overlook the political effect of the other pivot point, the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans.
The Benghazi attack appears to have started slowly sapping Obama’s support in late September. . . .
Please read the whole thing at The American Spectator. And please pay close attention to the last three words.
- Oct. 20: My Beer vs. Nate Silver’s Two Beers
- Oct. 19: Nate Silver Asks: Whose Shark Is This, and Why Do I Feel a Need to Jump It?
- Oct. 18: GALLUP: ROMNEY 52, OBAMA 45 — Let the Great 2012 Liberal Freak-Out Begin!
- Oct. 15: Did You Say ‘Preference Cascade’?
- Oct. 14: ‘Media Credibility Day Is Coming’
- Oct. 11: Benghazi Breakdown: Team Obama, Liberals Now in Full Freak-Out Mode
- Oct. 9: Expect the Unexpected: Why Liberals Suddenly Melted Down After the Debate
- Oct. 8: Liberals Beginning to Realize They’ve Overestimated Obama’s Popularity?