RCP poll averages predicted 49 of 50 states

posted at 3:22 pm on November 7, 2012 by Allahpundit

One last 2012 poll post for old times’ sake before we start in bright and early tomorrow morning with 2016 polls. (Joking, joking.) There was one basic meta-question in the sturm and drang over Nate Silver and statistical models: Were the state polls showing Obama sweeping the midwest correct or were the national polls, some of which had Romney ahead even at the very end, right in predicting a photo finish? Now we know. Sean Trende thoughtfully weighed the case for both sides a few days ago. My assumption, like many other people’s, was that O couldn’t duplicate the turnout he generated in 2008. All the polls showing, say, a D+6 advantage simply had to be wrong, as that was way too close to the D+7 he grabbed back then. There was too much stacked against him this time — unemployment near eight percent, liberal disillusionment with the pace of “progress,” a fervently negative campaign that demolished his Hopenchange brand, etc etc. Plus, Republicans couldn’t wait to get to the polls to beat him, and had even come to genuinely like Romney as he campaigned down the stretch. Logically, I thought, the best O could do was maybe D+3 and probably it’d be closer than that. Actual result, per the national exit poll: D+6. That’s why last night is so alarming. 2008 could be dismissed as a fluke but last night smells more like realignment. He essentially duplicated the results of his first “experiment,” which, in science, means we have validation of a hypothesis. Hypothesis: If Democrats can muster that sort of advantage even in the worst of times (albeit with heavy GOTV help from Obama’s superb organization), then the GOP’s starting each election in the near term in a hole.

So some of the national polls like Gallup and Rasmussen were wrong and the state polls were right. See for yourself by checking the final averages of the toss-up states on RCP’s election page. They accurately predicted the winner everywhere except Florida, and in fact frequently underestimated Obama’s final margin. (In other words, the polls were slightly skewed for, er, Romney.) If the state polls were right then the models based on state polls were also bound to be right, which meant that Silver’s probability model was right for all 50 states — as was the model developed by Stanford prof Simon Jackman for HuffPo, as was the Votomatic model developed by Drew Linzer. Jackman’s model, in fact, nailed the margin in Florida, and Linzer predicted flat out the morning of the election that Obama would net 332 electoral votes, which looks to be spot on. Impressive stuff, but not surprising given their baseline: They were modeling based on the state polls, so if the state polls looked good for O, then so would the model. For that reason, I never understood the ferocious antagonism online lately to Silver. He wasn’t the one churning out the data showing an Obama win, the state pollsters were. Says Linzer:

I’ll add, though, that on the eve of the election, averaging the polls, or running them through any sort of sensible model, isn’t all that hard. We are all using the same data (more or less) and so it doesn’t surprise me that we’re all reaching similar conclusions. The real challenge is producing meaningful and accurate forecasts early in the campaign. My model is designed to be robust to short-term fluctuations in the polls, and converge in a stable and gradual manner to the final, Election Day estimates. It appears that in this regard, the model has worked as intended.

But from a broader perspective, my model has been predicting that Obama will win 332 electoral votes – give or take – since June. If all of us are correct today, the next question to ask is when each model arrived at the ultimate outcome.

Note that last paragraph. If you thought there was poll angst this time, imagine what it’ll look like in two years when Linzer or Jackman or Silver starts showing a victory for one side or the other in the midterms four months out from election day and that side’s supporters have to confront this track record. If you’re a baseball fan and think the sport’s too top heavy with sabermetric analysis, wait until political junkies fully absorb the Jackman/Silver/Linzer record this time. You’ll need a statistics degree to follow elections soon.

Oh, and because I know you’re curious: The single most accurate pollster of the cycle, according to Fordham University’s polisci department, was PPP, a.k.a. Kos’s pollster. Out of 28 polling orgs, Rasmussen and Gallup tied for 24th.

Update: Good point from the comments about the saber-metrizing of politics:

If Silver or Tom Tango or Bill James or Keith Law projects a 3.2 fWAR, .240/25/102 slash line, .810 OPS and 130 OPS+ for, say, Ryan Braun, that’s not going to make his real life numbers suddenly decline. He’s not going to despair over getting bad projections from Fangraphs.

But if Linzer is accurate this year 4 months out, and he calls it for Cuomo/Hillary/Warren/Booker in June of 2016, it could have a depressing effect on GOP GOTV efforts. The lines of causality go both ways.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

but but but… poll bias!!!11!!!!!!!!!!11!!

we got hoodwinked

gatorboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Wow, that last bit stings. I honestly don’t know what went wrong. I think Rush may have called it on his show today: “In a country of kids, you can’t beat Santa Claus”.

Not too many bright sides to last night.

akaniku on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

I hoped you’d post this. “Rasmussen and Gallup vs. the World,” indeed. And “the World” won.

I’m guessing, Ed, that we won’t be routinely deconstructing poll samples for the foreseeable future? Considering how that was basically shutting our eyes to the truth?

KingGold on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

So, AP, when do we get the super ultimate Eeyore post to end all Eeyore posts?

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

In a few days we will learn it was stolen. Bank on it.

nobar on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Why does it give me an eerie feeling that the tallied results were carefully matched to the predictions, not the other way around?

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Oh, and because I know you’re curious: The single most accurate pollster of the cycle, according to Fordham University’s polisci department, was PPP, a.k.a. Kos’s pollster. Out of 28 polling orgs, Rasmussen and Gallup tied for 24th.

What, no more melty bunnies?

Alpha_Male on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

People thought they were voting for Romney and the voting machines changed it to Obama. Here in Colorado, the republicans were leading early voting and should have won on the 6th. How did Obama end up winning Colorado by 5 points? There was just so much more excitement this time around than there was for McCain. It has to be cheating.

peakspike on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

What, no more melty bunnies?

Alpha_Male on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

We’re far, far past melting bunnies.

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I don’t blame us for thinking the way we did.

We had two years of polls showing us with the ID gap and enthusiasm gap on our side.

blatantblue on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Logically, I thought, the best O could do was maybe D+3 and probably it’d be closer than that. Actual result, per the national exit poll: D+6. That’s why last night is so alarming. 2008 could be dismissed as a fluke but last night smells more like realignment.

It still makes very little sense. 2004 and 2010 both bore little resemblance to the 2008 and 2012 partisan breakdowns(not sure what it was for 2006). Is it just that Obama is (half)black and more of a celebrity than a politician and that accounts for the high turnout of minority voters and young’uns? Would the same number of Dems showed up to vote had the candidate been Cuomo or O’Malley or even Hillary? And what exactly explains Romney drawing fewer voters than even McCain in 2008? That to me is the biggest WTF of this election.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I don’t know this country anymore.

DanMan on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Why does it give me an eerie feeling that the tallied results were carefully matched to the predictions, not the other way around?

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Because you’re off your meds

Alpha_Male on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

KingGold on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Allah, not Ed. I forgot, it’s the afternoon.

KingGold on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

It has to be cheating.

peakspike on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I am inclined to agree with you but I want to see the final numbers first. I don’t think CO makes any sense, nor do I think FL makes any sense. Everything else, maybe.

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Reagan popular vote 1984 55.4 million…US population 236 million
Romney popular vote 2012 57.1 million…US population 305 million.

Think about that for a minute. 69 million more people yet Romney gets a net of only 1.7 million more votes that Reagan did in 1984.

bgibbs1000 on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

I can’t explain it — and that probably means we are doomed.

We can’t “appeal to Latinos” — Ted Cruz lost every Latino border county by 35 points to a fat white good ole democrat in Texas. HISPANICS WILL NOT VOTE GOP.

The increasingly atheist northeast and Midwest are huge too.

Ditto the fact marriage rates have plummeted and marriage correlates with GOP voting.

Look, I don’t see the GOP winning the presidency again in my lifetime. We have lost 5 of the last 6 popular votes. Latino votes and amnesty will doom us.

Think I’m kidding? Look at Mexico. They had one party rule for 75 years until just a decade ago.

I think the GOP should say gay marriage and drugs are state issues and basically absorb the libertarians. I hate to say it but suck up the Ron Paul wing.

But after that??? Florida is gone. That alone is killer. Ruy Texera is right… The GOP is over, and Hispanics don’t vote for Hispanic republicans.

CRAP!

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

It’s Mourning in America…

OmahaConservative on November 7, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Because you’re off your meds

Alpha_Male on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Why don’t you go and stuff your alpha tongue up your beta shaft?

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:31 PM

And what exactly explains Romney drawing fewer voters than even McCain in 2008? That to me is the biggest WTF of this election.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Yup.

the_nile on November 7, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Nate Silver called 50 out of 50. We may not like his politics, but the numbers were dead on. The real question is why a liberal like that was shooting straighter than most of our own.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

I guess that means you should move to the woods and prepare for end times.

wargamer6 on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

It will all need to be in ashes before the majority will realize…sad but true.

NY Conservative on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

the democrats would be crazy if they ever nominate someone OTHER than an African American again

You are guaranteed record turnout and 100% of 13% + 2/3 of Latinos.

Really. Cuomo and Hillary are crazy. Booker would win going away.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

People thought they were voting for Romney and the voting machines changed it to Obama. Here in Colorado, the republicans were leading early voting and should have won on the 6th. How did Obama end up winning Colorado by 5 points? There was just so much more excitement this time around than there was for McCain. It has to be cheating.

peakspike on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I don’t think it has to be cheating, although I get the skepticism. That’s gonna have to be explained by the Republican establishment. Our intensity was high. The rallies were huge. Fundraising was beating out even Obama’s. The Paul Ryan VP pick and the first debate energized conservatives. And of course we were all desperate to defeat Obama. So where in the hell were the voters on Election Day?

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

There was just so much more excitement this time around than there was for McCain.

peakspike on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

That’s what is sticking in my craw…

People were actually pumped about this one yet THREE MILLION FEWER PEOPLE voted for Romney than voted for McCain?

WTF!!!!!

catmman on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

DanMan on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Get the film 2016 and the future will be deja vu!

IlikedAUH2O on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

No doubt state polls were more accurate than national. Interestingly enough, that is a total reversal from 2010.

The greatest puzzle to me was the Voter ID variance. National polls with the largest samples on this (15,000+; low MOE) suggested an electorate of R+1 or even higher. That’s what many here based their (in hindsight) optimistic predictions on. Actual Exit Poll data suggests D+6. That’s a HUGE discrepancy.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Look, I don’t see the GOP winning the presidency again in my lifetime. We have lost 5 of the last 6 popular votes. Latino votes and amnesty will doom us.

Think I’m kidding? Look at Mexico. They had one party rule for 75 years until just a decade ago.

I think the GOP should say gay marriage and drugs are state issues and basically absorb the libertarians. I hate to say it but suck up the Ron Paul wing.

But after that??? Florida is gone. That alone is killer. Ruy Texera is right… The GOP is over, and Hispanics don’t vote for Hispanic republicans.

CRAP!

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Yep.

Seriously considering disconnecting from HA and the political world for quite a while. Possibly for good. Like following SMU (my alma mater) football, there’s no point in watching when you already know the results.

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I guess that means you should move to the woods and prepare for end times.
wargamer6 on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Do you disagree? In what scenario does the GOP win another election? How? Which states do we take?

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I’m guessing, Ed, that we won’t be routinely deconstructing poll samples for the foreseeable future? Considering how that was basically shutting our eyes to the truth?

KingGold on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Uh, why wouldn’t we? It makes sense to deconstruct the samples, because if the samples are wrong, all the models will be wrong, as well.

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:35 PM

game over man, game over.

I never bought into the, “Well it can’t be the same model as 2008 because, well it can’t.” As long as we run old man whitey against some hip minority, the minorities will show up to vote their guy in.

rndmusrnm on November 7, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Is it just that Obama is (half)black and more of a celebrity than a politician and that accounts for the high turnout of minority voters and young’uns?

It’s all about the turnout operation. Look at the final advertisment spending figures for both campaigns: Romney’s dwarfs Obama’s. Where was Obama investing all his money instead? His GOTV apparatus. And don’t think Organizing for America is just going to disappear after Obama’s finished winning national elections. He’s going to have one of the most lucrative businesses in the political world after he’s finished with his second term, and it’s going to be exclusively available to Democratic candidates with deep pockets. The GOP is in for a world of hurt if it doesn’t develop something on par, and fast.

Armin Tamzarian on November 7, 2012 at 3:35 PM

In a few days we will learn it was stolen. Bank on it.

nobar on November 7, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Massive missing Military ballets and some counties lost the paper ballets but still have totals. Some Machines show that there was 20 people that voted on it but last night it showed 2000. They will find trucks of thousands of shredded ballets in SEIU trucks. The dead need not vote when they remove whole swaths of Romney vote.

tjexcite on November 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Why does it give me an eerie feeling that the tallied results were carefully matched to the predictions, not the other way around?

you too? we broke records for lines in a state that isn’t a swing state at all and we wake up to find voting dropped by 14 million for a 12% drop? Remember when we used to hear votes in certain precints amounted to 15% more than registered voters? I think they’ve found a new way to cheat.

DanMan on November 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM

“The single most accurate pollster of the cycle, according to Fordham University’s polisci department, was PPP, a.k.a. Kos’s pollster. Out of 28 polling orgs, Rasmussen and Gallup tied for 24th.”

—————————————–

Holy Hell

corujodp on November 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Seriously considering disconnecting from HA and the political world for quite a while. Possibly for good…..

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

same here

NY Conservative on November 7, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Nate Silver called 50 out of 50. We may not like his politics, but the numbers were dead on. The real question is why a liberal like that was shooting straighter than most of our own.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

There is an exact and very precise answer for that. We were guessing whether that or another poll was real, weighted, or an outright fake. He had the verified, first-hand information straight from the polling companies. If you think you can really compete against insiders, try stock market.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:37 PM

the democrats would be crazy if they ever nominate someone OTHER than an African American again

You are guaranteed record turnout and 100% of 13% + 2/3 of Latinos.

Really. Cuomo and Hillary are crazy. Booker would win going away.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

I agree. A few days ago, I said that Tony Villar, Julian Castro, and Cory Booker are all weak choices for the Dems in 2016 because they’ve only been mayors(and Villar has been a horrible one). But since it’s clear after Obama’s 2 wins that neither experience nor competence matter to a majority of the American electorate, the Dems would be nutz to not field one of them.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Its unfortunate, but just like Russia awakened to Communism having to break down before it understood that all “Free” stuff comes to an end – so will America.

Romney was on one corner with a Help Wanted sign and Obama was on the other corner with an ATM. Where do you think the citizens went to?

rgrovr on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

It is high time to ditch the “fifty plus one” method from Karl Rove, et. al.

Full national push.

Why does NYS have NO Republican presence? Because the national party ditched it to pursue this 50+1 strategy.

Full national push!

blatantblue on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

You say you can’t explain it, then you do.

It’s simple math. 1 in 3 whites will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff. 2 in three hispanics will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff, and 8 in 10 blacks will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that will promise to give them the most free stuff. We have aborted, immigrated and welfared-stated ourselves into a death spiral.

Ted Torgerson on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Obama looks like the child of Mussolini/Lenin.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

It will all need to be in ashes before the majority will realize…sad but true.

NY Conservative on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Because them Media will tell them that the fire they are burning in is just the warmth of Obama’s greatness.

tjexcite on November 7, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I honestly don’t know what went wrong. I think Rush may have called it on his show today: “In a country of kids, you can’t beat Santa Claus”.

akaniku on November 7, 2012 at 3:27 PM

I’m amazed. You picked out the most poignant thing said today and you didn’t even try and turn it into a joke.

I tip my tripla to you, lady.

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:39 PM

Nate Silver called 50 out of 50. We may not like his politics, but the numbers were dead on. The real question is why a liberal like that was shooting straighter than most of our own.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Liberals are usually more educated and smarter as a group compared to Conservatives. Other hand, Cons have big balls…Not always appropriate.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Nate Silver called 50 out of 50. We may not like his politics, but the numbers were dead on. The real question is why a liberal like that was shooting straighter than most of our own.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

So did Linzer. So could any stats undergrad running Monte Carlo sims with the state polling data from the last week.

I don’t see why anyone is surprised. If state polling is accurate, models based on state polls will be accurate. But does that mean we should always trust state polling in the future? Hell no.

But someone made a good point re: the difference between “sabermetric” analysis in baseball and in politics.

If Silver or Tom Tango or Bill James or Keith Law projects a 3.2 fWAR, .240/25/102 slash line, .810 OPS and 130 OPS+ for, say, Ryan Braun, that’s not going to make his real life numbers suddenly decline. He’s not going to despair over getting bad projections from Fangraphs.

But if Linzer is accurate this year 4 months out, and he calls it for Cuomo/Hillary/Warren/Booker in June of 2016, it could have a depressing effect on GOP GOTV efforts. The lines of causality go both ways.

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

It makes sense to deconstruct the samples, because if the samples are wrong, all the models will be wrong, as well.
Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:35 PM

that only makes sense if you have a way to tell that the samples are wrong. Clearly Ed does not posses such skills. Unfortunately, based on his posts today, he doesn’t seem to understand that.

red_herring on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Stereotype much, Skippy?

kingsjester on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Reagan popular vote 1984 55.4 million…US population 236 million
Romney popular vote 2012 57.1 million…US population 305 million.

Think about that for a minute. 69 million more people yet Romney gets a net of only 1.7 million more votes that Reagan did in 1984.

bgibbs1000 on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

As I said last night, Reagan would not have won last night.

Freedom requires vigilance and work. The 1960s took care of that.

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Liberals are usually more educated and smarter as a group compared to Conservatives. Other hand, Cons have big balls…Not always appropriate.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

In studies performed by liberal researchers at liberal universities. Shocking outcome!

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

i have been copy pasting the rcp average here often and was called a troll.

nathor on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

It still makes very little sense. 2004 and 2010 both bore little resemblance to the 2008 and 2012 partisan breakdowns(not sure what it was for 2006). Is it just that Obama is (half)black and more of a celebrity than a politician and that accounts for the high turnout of minority voters and young’uns? Would the same number of Dems showed up to vote had the candidate been Cuomo or O’Malley or even Hillary? And what exactly explains Romney drawing fewer voters than even McCain in 2008? That to me is the biggest WTF of this election.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Sure it makes sense.

2004 GW Bush ran very conservative. Even Mitt went up in the polls after he spoke conservatism in the first debate.

2010 The Tea Party ran very conservative. They ran against Obama Care (a message ignored when Romney was nominated).

Conservatism won both times.

2008 McCain ran as a moderate. After GW had become very moderate in his second term and pushed Amnesty causing us to lose the Senate and House in 2006.

2012 Mitt ran as a total Democrat like liberal.

Moderate/Liberalism loses every time for Republicans. But in 2012 we also ignored the 2010 message no Obama Care or candidate that ever supported it in any form.

Steveangell on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

For that reason, I never understood the ferocious antagonism online lately to Silver.

Much like Jesus, it’s not really him it’s some of his followers that make people nuts.

(sorry Jesus, you know it’s true though)

Dash on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Get the film 2016 and the future will be deja vu!

saw it goldwater, I used to be of the opinion that we could trust the will of the people. Even when Obama was first elected I figured either he’d surprise me and be up to the task or not and get the boot. We are suffering through easily the worst economy of my life with clear choices to make it better and the people voted to end it all. I didn’t see that coming.

DanMan on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

that only makes sense if you have a way to tell that the samples are wrong. Clearly Ed does not posses such skills. Unfortunately, based on his posts today, he doesn’t seem to understand that.

red_herring on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

Ed was right to be suspect of a D+7 sample given what happened in 2010, but he didn’t account for depressed outcome among GOP voters.

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Do you disagree? In what scenario does the GOP win another election? How? Which states do we take?

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Well I’m not ready for a totally defeatist attitude. First of all, it’s worth noting that FL, OH, VA, and WI were relatively close(some of them razor-thin). Flip all of those in 2016 and the GOP wins the Presidency.

Secondly, 4 more years of Obama can change a lot of minds. Gone is the luxury of blaming Bush. Sure, many Dems will continue to spin or make excuses, but in the 2nd term, Obamacare, tax hikes, further defense cuts, and increased regulation on businesses and energy will all go into effect. The Democrat Party will own the outcome of these policies. That will have a major impact on the 2014 and 2016 elections.

The only downside is this will require suffering an enormous amount of pain before we can take back this country.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Seriously considering disconnecting from HA and the political world for quite a while. Possibly for good….

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Ditto…Da Bears!

CTSherman on November 7, 2012 at 3:44 PM

i have been copy pasting the rcp average here often and was called a troll.

nathor on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

And you were right. But for no other reason than the fact you are a leftist and your side won.

Had Romney won, you wouldn’t be here.

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

If you think you can really compete against insiders, try stock market.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Sad, but true.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

So then explain to me why Obama only won among those making under 50k and Romney got the majority of non post-graduate college educated Americans? And I’m not being fascetious, because it would seem from first glance that the dems are basically an entitled lot of troglodytic thugs with a cabal of college professors leading the charge. But perhaps that’ my own bias speaking.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Is it just that Obama is (half)black and more of a celebrity than a politician and that accounts for the high turnout of minority voters and young’uns? Would the same number of Dems showed up to vote had the candidate been Cuomo or O’Malley or even Hillary? And what exactly explains Romney drawing fewer voters than even McCain in 2008? That to me is the biggest WTF of this election.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Yes, No, and Sarah Palin.

alwaysfiredup on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Disappointed, but refuse to go down without a fight.

El_Terrible on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

You guys were kept in the dark.

Did you know that Silver actually bet MorningJoe 2K that he was right?

Did you know that the momentum went back to Obama after the 3rd debate?

Did you know how damaging that Jeep ad was to Mitt when the CEOs came out swinging at him publicly? This was on local tv coverage in OH, IA and MI.

You can call me lib all you want, my bottom line is this:

This is God’s will, who am I to doubt my Creator? May thy will be done.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

In hindsight I guess the polls were spot on. It isn’t that far of a stretch to think that on Jan. 21, 2009, Team Obama started grid charts, recruiting volunteers, putting deposits down on buses, and attending neighborhood meetings. Behind the scenes they were probably a well-oiled machine. Out in front, they were nasty and brutal. Apparently, an effective combination.

salem on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

The single most accurate pollster of the cycle, according to Fordham University’s polisci department, was PPP, a.k.a. Kos’s pollster. Out of 28 polling orgs, Rasmussen and Gallup tied for 24th.

the misery never ends.

sesquipedalian on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Steveangell on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Don’t blame me. I wanted Palin to run.

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

You want to follow PPP and Nate Silver from now on, do it on your peril… If conservatives are going to embrace these lefties because they got the election right then they are going to DEMORALIZE the hell out of you in the coming elections…

mnjg on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Smith & Wesson and Ruger are up by 5% today.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

The single most accurate pollster of the cycle, according to Fordham University’s polisci department, was PPP, a.k.a. Kos’s pollster. Out of 28 polling orgs, Rasmussen and Gallup tied for 24th. posted at 3:22 pm on November 7, 2012 by Allahpundit

Well, yeah, but that’s because the liberal approach to elections is different. Kos fired their previous pollster when they gave them bogus results. Free market in action. On the right, it’s much more important for Ras to be a water carrier and buck up the troops than to be exactly right about the numbers. He serves his purpose and is paid for that.

sauldalinsky on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

I had a bad feeling when I went and voted yesterday. Got to my polling station a little after 9am. Got right in, no wait. I figured the morning rush was over; you know most people had already got through who went to vote before they went to work.

My wife got off work and went to our polling place. This was between 2:30 and 3pm. She called me to come get her (she had walked to the polling place, its right around the corner from her work). She told me she got right in, no wait – in and out.

The parking lot was bare. No lines in or out, wither time we voted yesterday.

All we had to do was turn out in 08 numbers and its over.

We couldn’t even do that.

Addendum: When I went in the morning, I didn’t notice any Romney/Ryan signs but some Obama/Biden signs. After I voted i drove to the Francisco Canseco headquarters near my house (right next to my wife’s work conveniently enough) and told them about it. They said they didn’t have that kind of interaction with the national campaign, that I’d have to contact the county GOP office. They said they would send them an e-amil about it though. Got home tried to call them myself but couldn’t get through. Sent them an e-mail and left them a message on their Facebook page as well – never got any response.

My family and I were enthused. We donated money. Put up yard signs.

Too bad there weren’t near as much as enthused and supportive as me and mine.

catmman on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

isappointed, but refuse to go down without a fight.

El_Terrible on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Same.

blatantblue on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

One last 2012 poll post for old times’ sake before we start in bright and early tomorrow morning with 2016 polls

Hmmm…methinks there won’t be an election in 2016. The Big Empty will have set himself up as king by then, by executive order.

bigbeachbird on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Does GumbyandPokey have a website we can monitor for the 2014 election cycle?

Because he was 100% right.

portlandon on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

that only makes sense if you have a way to tell that the samples are wrong. Clearly Ed does not posses such skills. Unfortunately, based on his posts today, he doesn’t seem to understand that.

red_herring on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

What ED and AP were doing in the run-up to the election was little more than a slightly higher-brow version of what that fat stupid moron Dean Chambers was doing by “unskewing” polls: changing the numbers until they look the way you want them to. Pretty sad to see on a site that normally does good work.

Armin Tamzarian on November 7, 2012 at 3:47 PM

You say you can’t explain it, then you do.
It’s simple math. 1 in 3 whites will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff. 2 in three hispanics will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff, and 8 in 10 blacks will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that will promise to give them the most free stuff. We have aborted, immigrated and welfared-stated ourselves into a death spiral.
Ted Torgerson on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

No what I can’t explain is: how do we change this?

How do you win?

And “running Hispanics” isn’t working well. How many Latino governors do we have, Latinos in congress from stinking Idaho to Florida, senatorS….. and yet none if those folks carry majority votes of Hispanics.

Seriously I think the GOP is done at the national level for 30-40 years. The math becomes impossible once Texas flips. Florida is mostly there.

CA + NY + FL + IL + PA + TX + MI is about 200EVs to start. Add in the northeast and you are at 270.

The dems will have 270 before setting foot in Ohio, Minnesota, Oregon…..

we are screwed.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

There is an exact and very precise answer for that. We were guessing whether that or another poll was real, weighted, or an outright fake. He had the verified, first-hand information straight from the polling companies. If you think you can really compete against insiders, try stock market.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:37 PM

nate silver did not have that much more insider info. the thing he does that rcp doesn’t his to weight the polls against their previous accuracy.relatively easy stuff to do and its amazingly efficient.
but that does not excuse ppl from not even believing the RCP average. its really sad you set yourself up to big disappointments like that.

nathor on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Liberals are usually more educated and smarter as a group compared to Conservatives. Other hand, Cons have big balls…Not always appropriate.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

You could be right, I don’t know a single conservative who can speak Austrian or who can identify all 57 states on a map.

Bishop on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Look, I don’t see the GOP winning the presidency again in my lifetime. We have lost 5 of the last 6 popular votes. Latino votes and amnesty will doom us.

Think I’m kidding? Look at Mexico. They had one party rule for 75 years until just a decade ago.

I think the GOP should say gay marriage and drugs are state issues and basically absorb the libertarians. I hate to say it but suck up the Ron Paul wing.

But after that??? Florida is gone. That alone is killer. Ruy Texera is right… The GOP is over, and Hispanics don’t vote for Hispanic republicans.

CRAP!

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Yeah. I honestly think I’m through with this garbage. As I said earlier, I was at my polling place all day yesterday volunteering for the Romney campaign. Turnout was good (Romney ended up taking my precinct with more votes than McCain got), and I was feeling optimistic. Then I get home and see that not only did the Dems come out, but that folks on my “side” apparently didn’t.

changer1701 on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Liberals are usually more educated and smarter as a group compared to Conservatives. Other hand, Cons have big balls…Not always appropriate.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Yeah. Especially the urban liberals in Newark, NJ and Bronx, NY. True titans of intellectualism.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

People thought they were voting for Romney and the voting machines changed it to Obama. Here in Colorado, the republicans were leading early voting and should have won on the 6th. How did Obama end up winning Colorado by 5 points? There was just so much more excitement this time around than there was for McCain. It has to be cheating.

peakspike on November 7, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Very good question. While I am no conspiracy nut, but this is beyond comphrension to me. Problem is we don’t have much exit poll data on Colorado.

We know registered Republicans led registred Democrats in early voting by roughly 30,000 (that’s 3/4 of the total vote cast in CO since so many vote early here). We also know Romney won independents nationwide, and Colorado’s independents closely matched the national independents in 2008. So for the same argument, let’s say early independents split evenly. Assuming no cross over voting; that should give Romnney a lead of appx 45,000 votes with 75% of the vote in.

Now with 93% of the vote counted in the state; Obama leads by 111k..WTF??!

Only can be explained two ways:

1. Obama won independents by a 60/40 margin
2. Obama won election day voters by a 80/20 margin

Neither is possible given Exit Poll data. Something is very fishy here.

Norwegian on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

The lines of causality go both ways.

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:41 PM

That’s a good take on it, I’m going to have remember that.

In studies performed by liberal researchers at liberal universities. Shocking outcome!

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Don’t give his meme any life. We have the national exit poll. Only low income types and post-grad degree holders went for Obama in the majority. And yes, I’m purposefully avoiding any reference to race or gender.

abobo on November 7, 2012 at 3:49 PM

The dems will have 270 before setting foot in Ohio, Minnesota, Oregon…..

we are screwed.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

No, they are. You starve the looters. The idiotic moochers will dwell in the dark, hungry and forgotten.

Obama only cares about himself, the Pimp of all the Looters.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Sure it makes sense.

Moderate/Liberalism loses every time for Republicans. But in 2012 we also ignored the 2010 message no Obama Care or candidate that ever supported it in any form.

Steveangell on November 7, 2012 at 3:42 PM

I disagree. You’re right about McCain. He depressed the base with his moderate views. But Romney ran as a conservative. He was somewhat moderate on tax policy, but overall he preached free market capitalism and conservative principles. People can question his sincerity and the prospect of him flip-flopping once elected, but this was not McCain redux.

I can accept more Americans voting for Obama than Romney. It means we’re in serious trouble as a nation, but there are explanations for that outcome. But I don’t know if I’ll ever understand how McCain got more votes than Romney. That to me is inexplicable and has to be explained so it’s never allowed to happen again. Hell, at this point I’ll accept anti-Mormon bigotry as the reason.

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:49 PM

they are going to DEMORALIZE the hell out of you in the coming elections…

mnjg on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Who was demoralized? We ALL went and voted for Romney, save steveangell, FloatingCrock and a coupla others.

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Smith & Wesson and Ruger are up by 5% today.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:46 PM

Thanks partly to me; there is a brand new S&W MP 15-22 sitting on my shop table, just got it this morning.

Bishop on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Liberals are usually more educated and smarter as a group compared to Conservatives. Other hand, Cons have big balls…Not always appropriate.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Heh, that’s why so many moochers love to dwell in the modern day plantations. Thanks for the laughs.

You are pathetic.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

This is God’s will, who am I to doubt my Creator? May thy will be done.

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM

It’s not God’s will, it’s the will of the American people.

They want 4 more years of this? Hey, more power to them. Mencken was right. The people know what they want, and they deserve to get it good and hard.

Good Solid B-Plus on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Seriously considering disconnecting from HA and the political world for quite a while. Possibly for good….

John_Locke on November 7, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I’m probably right behind you. I’ve invested way too much time in the bubble here.

Time to cash out of the stock market and get back to my work.

JPeterman on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

The dems will have 270 before setting foot in Ohio, Minnesota, Oregon…..

we are screwed.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

embrace immigration reform and amnesty. do it or it will be truly rammed down your throats sooner or latter.

nathor on November 7, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Reagan popular vote 1984 55.4 million…US population 236 million
Romney popular vote 2012 57.1 million…US population 305 million.

Think about that for a minute. 69 million more people yet Romney gets a net of only 1.7 million more votes than Reagan did in 1984.

bgibbs1000 on November 7, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Also, assuming Obama’s vote total remained the same, Romney would have needed 12 million more votes to match Reagan’s 1984 popular vote percentage of 58.8% in a country whose population has increased by 69 million.

WTF is going on?

bgibbs1000 on November 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Do not blame Obama, blame the people of America who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of “the new, wonderful, good society” which shall now be America’s, interpreted to mean: more money, more ease, more security, more living fault at the expense of the industrious. – “Cicero”

VorDaj on November 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 7, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Yeah. Especially the urban liberals in Newark, NJ and Bronx, NY. True titans of intellectualism.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Obama phone lady and the rest of the 52%, heh.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM

To me, the top line takeaway from the presidential election is that we are now a nation that cannot resist a class warfare argument. In Ohio, Obama ran a TV ad repeatedly that highlighted Romney’s Swiss bank account and Cayman Islands investments and ended with a text-over that simply said: “He’s not one of us.” Although it had subtle (maybe not too subtle) racial overtones, the main thrust of the ad was: Rich against Poor. How rich people get away with making this argument repeatedly just because they have a “D” next to their name is a question the Republican party had better figure out and fast or they will keep losing elections.

The Republicans have become the party “of the rich people” to a wide swath of the electorate. They had better do something about that.

jdp629 on November 7, 2012 at 3:52 PM

The dems will have 270 before setting foot in Ohio, Minnesota, Oregon…..

we are screwed.

picklesgap on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Of course!

Did you really think America was gonna last forever?

All good things and such…

Lanceman on November 7, 2012 at 3:52 PM

I don’t think it has to be cheating, although I get the skepticism. That’s gonna have to be explained by the Republican establishment. Our intensity was high. The rallies were huge. Fundraising was beating out even Obama’s. The Paul Ryan VP pick and the first debate energized conservatives. And of course we were all desperate to defeat Obama. So where in the hell were the voters on Election Day?

Doughboy on November 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM

This. Infinity this.

Everyone is slamming on conservatives who said this wasn’t like the ’08 election. IT WASN’T like the ’08 election. Obama only pulled Kerry numbers last night; that’s down 15%!

So how did we come all this way to pull 5% less than McCain ’08?

The Schaef on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

It’s simple math. 1 in 3 whites will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff. 2 in three hispanics will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that promises to give them the most free stuff, and 8 in 10 blacks will always vote for the candidate (of any race) that will promise to give them the most free stuff. We have aborted, immigrated and welfared-stated ourselves into a death spiral.

Ted Torgerson on November 7, 2012 at 3:38 PM

This.

But as someone else said last night: “Cheer up – it’s only going to get worse.”

Midas on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Bottom line is turnout among republicans decreased by about 17% from 2008!!! If Romney had gotten as many votes as McShame in OH, VA, CO and FL he would have won.

No realignment, just piss poor turnout on GOP side.

Raquel Pinkbullet on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

nate silver did not have that much more insider info. the thing he does that rcp doesn’t his to weight the polls against their previous accuracy.relatively easy stuff to do and its amazingly efficient.
but that does not excuse ppl from not even believing the RCP average. its really sad you set yourself up to big disappointments like that.

nathor on November 7, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I find it about as easy to believe that Nate Silver didn’t have insider info like I do that Candy Crowler didn’t leak the questions to Obama camp. I mean, it is technically possible, but very improbable. He is a Dem operative first and foremost, and a statistician second.

As for RCP, the culprit is the conservative habit of not trusting the integrity of anyone whom they cannot personally verify. Whether the habit is good or bad, I’ll not judge.

Archivarix on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Hypothesis: If Democrats can muster that sort of advantage even in the worst of times (albeit with heavy GOTV help from Obama’s superb organization), then the GOP’s starting each election in the near term in a hole.

Yep. The fact that Romney won independents and the enthusiasm gap and STILL lost is a bad, bad sign.

The Dem coalition is finally strong enough to overcome all other fundamentals.

BadgerHawk on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

VorDaj on November 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Indeed

JPeterman, find a way to not feed the beast. Work and get paid in other ways.

Let them finance their Utopian pipedream on their own. They’ll collapse sooner that way. Otherwise they use your efforts to buy more votes, the moochers live like sheep in squaller, the looters live like Obama and his.

Schadenfreude on November 7, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4