2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[kurai]

FiveThirtyEight - Now-cast



RealClearPolitics - General Election: Romney vs. Obama



Intrade - 2012 Presidential Election Winner (Individual)



Votamatic [no change]



electoral-vote.com



Talking Points Memo - Electoral Scoreboard



Huffington Post - Electoral Map



Karl Rove [no change]



UnSkewed Polls - Unskewed Projection



Princeton Election Consortium - Electoral College Map



Washington Dispatch - Electoral College Count [no change]

[mr_pikachu]

*scratches head*

Okay, so, I just want to point out something.

This was yesterday's UnSkewed Polls map:

UnSkewed Polls - Unskewed Projection [no change]

And here's the one from today:

UnSkewed Polls - Unskewed Projection

Discounting the safe/leaning weights, that's a 58-electorate swing. In 24 hours. I count Oregon, New Mexico, Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all switching columns at once.

I'm not saying that the people at UnSkewed Polls necessarily have a bad system. But, really, what happened in the election to cause that kind of swing overnight? Barring a candidate's arrest or untimely death, that just seems... I don't know, unlikely? I guess it's just odd to observe a poll that's so unstable compared to the others, even given the wide variance in the others' "stable" projections.

On a side note, Roy, I'd also be interested to see Leon provide proof that Romney was a rubber stamp, if only because I don't think such proof is possible for any politician (with the possible exception of those in comas). I mean, you're right that there are other ways a government leader influences policy decisions, so with that in mind, I'm not sure how you can prove that any candidate didn't do any of those things. Pretty much any politician, Romney included, engages in meetings with others. Proving that said politician had no influence over policy throughout any of those meetings is... well, good luck.

Briefly, proving the nonexistence of something, including proving that a politician did absolutely nothing, is generally impossible, so demanding such isn't really reasonable. (While I personally disagree with the original claim that it was used to challenge -- and I really don't care to get into an argument over religion and philosophy here -- Russell's teapot is a useful analogy to this situation.)

[Roy Karrde]

Discounting the safe/leaning weights, that's a 58-electorate swing. In 24 hours. I count Oregon, New Mexico, Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania all switching columns at once.

I'm not saying that the people at UnSkewed Polls necessarily have a bad system. But, really, what happened in the election to cause that kind of swing overnight? Barring a candidate's arrest or untimely death, that just seems... I don't know, unlikely? I guess it's just odd to observe a poll that's so unstable compared to the others, even given the wide variance in the others' "stable" projections.

One poll seems to be with out leaners and just presupposing that the politician will gain every state that leans their way, the other doesn't.