If you're anything like me, and for your own sake, I hope that's not the case, you have been inundated by reports about Romney's "momentum," by campaign ads (during Jeopardy last night, I counted 16), and pundits proclaiming "winners" of debates.
Here's the deal. Romney had some momentum after a lackluster performance by President Obama during the first presidential debate. Okay, a lot of momentum (which begs the question, should a presidential election be decided by who did well at a debate? But that's a question for another time). President Obama seemed to eke out a victory in the second debate, slowing the "Romentum." The third debate was another easy call, Obama won the debate.
By the way, I'm getting this info from polls.
You may be asking, "Hmm, I've heard a lot about these 'polls' but what exactly are these things?"
For starters, I can tell you what they are not. Polls are not long, slender, rounded pieces of wood or metal, typically used with one end placed in the ground as a support for something. Those are "poles." You've got to get that straight. I don't want there to be any confusion on that matter.
All silliness aside, I'm going to assume that everyone knows what a poll is.
Polls may be the best determinate in helping to calculate who will win the presidential election this year (and I would assume the same for many years to come until we switch over to a sorting hat system wherein a hat, not too different from that described in the Harry Potter books, will decide the fate of the candidates).
When you look at a poll, there are a number of things you can decipher, the most obvious being, who is ahead. However, we need to do some sorting (see what I did there?) before we really have a chance to decipher anything. For instance, where did this poll come from? If it is from any kind of political organization, if it comes from a party, you should probably just toss it out. That means say goodbye to PPP, Strategies 360, the Glengariff Group, even Rasmussen. Or we can take all that gobbledygook and mix it in with the other polls and hope that it all evens out.
Well if you do that. This is what the election looks like:
A tie. A statistical stalemate. A draw. Neck and neck. Deadlocked. My thesaurus doesn't have any other good synonyms, but you get the idea.
Check out www.realclearpolitics.com to see what I mean. You'll see that any collection of polls is clearly within any common margin of error (between two and four percent).
If you take a closer look, you can check out swing state polls which give you a better idea of who will win this election.
Sadly, about three states really determine the direction of an election. You can argue that New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Iowa, etc. are swing states and you'd be right, but look more closely and you'll see that the fate of the presidency rests in Ohio, Florida, and perhaps even Virginia.
Look at 2000 - Florida was the "problem state." It went red, Bush won.
And 2004 - Ohio was up in the air until Sen. John Kerry conceded the state that Wednesday afternoon. Bush won.
Now we're looking at 2012. Florida looks like it will go red. Virginia looks like a theoretical tie.
It's nearly impossible for Romney to win this election without winning all three, but Obama is holding on tight to Ohio. There are no major polls showing Romney with a lead in Ohio.
So here it comes. Hold on to your hats. Buckle up. I hate to say it but we're gearing up for...more math.
Uggh, I know. Everything you probably dreaded in high school and worked hard to avoid in college. I'm sorry but I can't make my point without it. Just bear with me. You get ice cream if you read the whole post!*
*No you don't.
This election seems to very much still be in Obama's favor according to - drumroll please - numbers. Numbers are currently the President's best friend. They are biffles. "Barry+Math Forever" should be etched onto trees all across the great Buckeye state.
To get a better idea what I'm saying, just scroll over to Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog at the New York Times. He takes polls, uses a magic numbers potion (that isn't magic because numbers are real), and churns out the odds each candidate has of winning the election. Currently, the President has a 68.1% chance of winning the election.
Numbers are the ultrasound of the election egg. Laid months ago by the presidential primary hen, we can see inside the egg, developing into a full-bodied, living election chick that will walking around on the night of November 6 or the early morning of the 7th.
Until the election egg has hatched, we can only rely on numbers to give us a better idea of what that chick will look like.
Here's the deal. Romney had some momentum after a lackluster performance by President Obama during the first presidential debate. Okay, a lot of momentum (which begs the question, should a presidential election be decided by who did well at a debate? But that's a question for another time). President Obama seemed to eke out a victory in the second debate, slowing the "Romentum." The third debate was another easy call, Obama won the debate.
By the way, I'm getting this info from polls.
You may be asking, "Hmm, I've heard a lot about these 'polls' but what exactly are these things?"
 |
| While a pole such as this may be good for displaying a flag, it has little to do with deciding an election of any kind. |
For starters, I can tell you what they are not. Polls are not long, slender, rounded pieces of wood or metal, typically used with one end placed in the ground as a support for something. Those are "poles." You've got to get that straight. I don't want there to be any confusion on that matter.
All silliness aside, I'm going to assume that everyone knows what a poll is.
Polls may be the best determinate in helping to calculate who will win the presidential election this year (and I would assume the same for many years to come until we switch over to a sorting hat system wherein a hat, not too different from that described in the Harry Potter books, will decide the fate of the candidates).
 |
| Future presidential election method? |
When you look at a poll, there are a number of things you can decipher, the most obvious being, who is ahead. However, we need to do some sorting (see what I did there?) before we really have a chance to decipher anything. For instance, where did this poll come from? If it is from any kind of political organization, if it comes from a party, you should probably just toss it out. That means say goodbye to PPP, Strategies 360, the Glengariff Group, even Rasmussen. Or we can take all that gobbledygook and mix it in with the other polls and hope that it all evens out.
Well if you do that. This is what the election looks like:
A tie. A statistical stalemate. A draw. Neck and neck. Deadlocked. My thesaurus doesn't have any other good synonyms, but you get the idea.
 |
| This presidential race currently resembles this piece of male suit accessory. |
Check out www.realclearpolitics.com to see what I mean. You'll see that any collection of polls is clearly within any common margin of error (between two and four percent).
If you take a closer look, you can check out swing state polls which give you a better idea of who will win this election.
Sadly, about three states really determine the direction of an election. You can argue that New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Iowa, etc. are swing states and you'd be right, but look more closely and you'll see that the fate of the presidency rests in Ohio, Florida, and perhaps even Virginia.
Look at 2000 - Florida was the "problem state." It went red, Bush won.
And 2004 - Ohio was up in the air until Sen. John Kerry conceded the state that Wednesday afternoon. Bush won.
Now we're looking at 2012. Florida looks like it will go red. Virginia looks like a theoretical tie.
It's nearly impossible for Romney to win this election without winning all three, but Obama is holding on tight to Ohio. There are no major polls showing Romney with a lead in Ohio.
So here it comes. Hold on to your hats. Buckle up. I hate to say it but we're gearing up for...more math.
Uggh, I know. Everything you probably dreaded in high school and worked hard to avoid in college. I'm sorry but I can't make my point without it. Just bear with me. You get ice cream if you read the whole post!*
*No you don't.
This election seems to very much still be in Obama's favor according to - drumroll please - numbers. Numbers are currently the President's best friend. They are biffles. "Barry+Math Forever" should be etched onto trees all across the great Buckeye state.
To get a better idea what I'm saying, just scroll over to Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight blog at the New York Times. He takes polls, uses a magic numbers potion (that isn't magic because numbers are real), and churns out the odds each candidate has of winning the election. Currently, the President has a 68.1% chance of winning the election.
Numbers are the ultrasound of the election egg. Laid months ago by the presidential primary hen, we can see inside the egg, developing into a full-bodied, living election chick that will walking around on the night of November 6 or the early morning of the 7th.
Until the election egg has hatched, we can only rely on numbers to give us a better idea of what that chick will look like.
0 comments:
Post a Comment