At 9/11/12 10:08 PM, Bolo wrote:
Quite frankly, I see almost no scenario in which Obama loses this election.
* Record: First of all, linking to a pro-Obama site is not proof of a 'sterling' record. Secondly, some of the stuff on there are not necessarily good things or very minor things. Expanding hate crime legislation comes to mind; its junk-food legislation. Thirdly, those are not really Obama's accomplishments but rather Congress'. Obama has been an exceptionally weak governor when it comes to pushing through major legislation. He stumps for it and is a figure head, but the real work has fallen to Congressional Democrats with little to no White House support. He spent all of his political capital (which in '08 was measured by the shit-ton) stumping for healthcare reform all the while loosing middle America and throwing blue dog Democrats under the bus and loosing a greater majority in Congress than any president in modern times has enjoyed. Finally, his economic numbers are shit. FDR was the last president to run with such dismal economic numbers and win.
* Incumbency: ALL presidential elections have an incumbent to some degree. There are three types of incumbency: president, vice-president and party. 1996, 2004 and 2012 are all presidential incumbency elections (the guy running is the president). 1988 and 2000 were vice-presidential incumbency where the sitting VP is running for the top slot. 2008 was a party incumbency year where voter's are deciding on which party to put in office; these are the years where each candidate's qualities are most equally important.
* SCOTUS & Healthcare: 1) SCOTUS upheld it by declaring it a tax...something the administration and Democrats said it was no. 2) That it was upheld does not translate into it being popular.
* bin-Laden is not going to be a reason someone does or does not vote for Obama. It was an easy call to make that took no political capital and extremely low political risk. Obama has enjoyed his bounce over this and it is over.
* This election is about Obama and the economy. The quality of Romney as a candidate is of very little importance. As long as the challenger is not too radical or a PR nightmare (read: Sarah Palin), the challenger will win or loose based on the preception of the incumbent president, vice-president or party.
Intrade, and nearly all swing state polls favor Obama. The Democratic convention was a rousing success. I'm willing to call it now as a 50+ margin electoral college victory for Obama, barring major catastrophe.
* Intrade, polls, etc: I trust polls. When I was in grad school I taught students why polls could be trusted and the science behind them. So when I say the following I am not some polling ludite who does not like the numbers and so dismisses them out of ignorance. Something seems off this year. I'm not sure why Obama is polling so well when historical trends say he should be trailing and secondary polls (ie: questions about who will do better on the economy are often tied or favoring Romney) seem to be going against him. I think there are three possible answers:
1) The Bradley Effect
Yes Camaro, I understand it was NOT present in 2008 and 'everyone' were looking for it everywhere. I talked to the election gurus in my political science department (hell most of them were at my watch party that night) and no one really expected it to be a factor back then. I didn't think it was in play. However, media outlets looking for sensational stories gave the fears of it rearing its ugly head legs.
But 2012 is different. I think we are more racially polarized now than we were back then. The professor Gates incident, DoJ dismissing charges against NBPP members in a slam-dunk voter intimidation case, congressmen saying they were called 'N****r' when the entire event was filmed and no one can corroberate his story and defining opposition to Obama's policies as being inheriently racist...I think makes some people very hesitant about expressing any desire (no matter how ideologically motivated and how racially NOT motivated that person may be) to vote Obama out.
So on election night...those swing states might not go Obama.
2) Modeling/construction error: many pollsters base their polls over the demographics of the last election. So the demographics of '08 strongly favored Obama. This year, not so much. Quite simply, pollsters may be asking more people in demographics where his support is iron-clad (ie: women, blacks) and underpolling the demographics that historically have swung elections (ie: white males). So the polls may just be wrong.
3) People may be sensitive to the historical nature of this election and my simply vote for him because he is black and they do not want the first black president to loose re-election.
* Conventions: I don't really watch them anymore. I find myself looking for Republican strengths and good sound bites and Democrat weaknesses and good sound bites to use against them. I usually come out thinking my side had a convention that was a 'rousing success' (just like you and the rest of the Democrat leaning posters thought about the DNC). Instead I prefer to look at the polls about two weeks after the last convention. Were the bounce each candidate got a 'bounce' (went up...then back down) or a 'trend' (either continues getting better or levels out higher). So we'll see who (if anyone) won the convention contest.
It would be foolish to try and predict the outcome of this election at this time.
I wish I could find it, but Nate Silver on his 538 blog for The New York Times put up a chart showing the different models. Basically the predictive models for this presidential election are split by type and there are three types:
1) Economic based models: all show an Obama with a high degree of certainty (highest was 85% chance of him loosing).
2) Polling based models: all show an Obama with a respectable degree of certainty (highest was in the mid 70s for him winning).
3) Mixed: tend to favor an Obama victory with his chances improving the more the model relies on polls.
Things may change in October, especially if October's job numbers are released and they are good or bad (or if the press buzz indicates they will be).
I'm an economic model kind of guy, they are objective and free of some of the bias issues of polling based models. So I'm thinking a Romney victory...within the margin of error. Which is essentially to reiterate that this is most likely going to be a horse race to the finish.