The MyDD EV Map methodology

I've been meaning to post something on this for a while, and have been swamped with work, but popped in here to see a diary on this issue. This is exactly the same mechanism that was used in 2004 on MyDD throughout the election.

As it says, when you click on either of the map counters of EV's:

"This Electoral Vote Map is updated constantly to forecast the 2008 Presidential election based on the latest available state polling."

The very latest poll in each state, without weighting or averaging.

There isn't a bias as to the pollster, if you see the poll listed as credible on Pollster.com, or RealClearPolitics.com, it'll be included. But, if the latest poll is tied, then the result remains the same as the previous latest poll.

This is a forecast made by the very latest poll. If you see a mistake, perhaps a poll was missed that is the latest, then point it out, and one of the admins will make the change.

The forecast isn't a prediction of the election, but a simple up-to-the-minute poll temperature of the state polling.

(update) And yes, you can edit the map yourself, as one user explains:

1) When you first log onto mydd, it populates the two maps with the most recent single poll for each state.

2) If you then click on the map and change it (for example, you don't believe that Hillary would lose WA to McCain), the numbers update to your settings - now it becomes like an EV calculator

3) The next time you log on, or refresh the page even, the counters go back to their poll-generated state.

Tags: transparency (all tags)

Comments

110 Comments

Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Okay, now that you got that out of the way.

How about the major controversy you have not addressed at all.

I don't even need to mention it,  There are 5 threads in the last 24 hours, one started by an Admin of your site.

We are waiting for a statement or action from you.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 01:09PM | 0 recs
Instead of bashing him for something this diary is

not even about, why not give credit where it is due, leave the thread, and raise your complaints elsewhere?

by PJ Jefferson 2008-05-15 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

um how about......... no.

This controversy is EXACTLY linked with the other via one word: BIAS.

Jerome has done zero to address the matter.

So while he is addressing the easier charge of Polling bias,  now he needs to address user bias.

Why did he feel the need to remove the ability to REC an article from over 200 people?
What did he hope that would achieve?
Does he plan on keeping this "sweep" past Hillary's concession speech?

Just because you say there isn't a controversy doesn't make it true (that kind of talk only works in the WH press room)

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 01:29PM | 0 recs
God you are a pain

geeez.

by kevin22262 2008-05-15 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: God you are a pain

He's not a pain. He's bravely raising an issue which a large majority of READERS here know about, and a significant number of WRITERS here are concerned about.

It concerns the transparency issue, the ability to discuss bias, debate its tenets, consolidate around rules which - if you've forgotten - is the fundamental tenet of the netroots movement and CTG

by duende 2008-05-15 02:23PM | 0 recs
Re: God you are a pain

He is a pain. He could do the same thing without coming across like a pain in the A.

by kevin22262 2008-05-15 09:40PM | 0 recs
I didn't say there isn't a controversy. I'm saying

that this diary is about the polls at the top of the page.  

That is what this diary is about.  

This diary is about that.  

That's what we're here for.  

That's what its all about.  

That's where its at.  

That's what the fuck is going on around here.  

That's the shizzle, the sizzle, and the fanizzle about this particular diary.

So, what do you comment about in this diary about the polls at the top of the page?  Rec and TR ability?

I think you're lost.

Was I more clear this time?

by PJ Jefferson 2008-05-15 01:34PM | 0 recs
Re: I didn't say there isn't a controversy. I'm sa

The point is gross bias.

The two issues are one in the same.

Bias, that is pointed at one or two individuals.

PJ, will you be happy when there is no more MYdd.com, where will you go.

You can't censor half your active members.

If you want me to leave, tell me, how is me reccing a diary so Dangerous to MyDD.com?
Answer that I am outa here.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 01:44PM | 0 recs
Re: I didn't say there isn't a controversy. I'm sa

One of the ways to lose your priveleges is by making lots of off-topic posts. Maybe your incessant questioning is the both the cause and answer to your incessant questions.

by LakersFan 2008-05-15 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: I didn't say there isn't a controversy. I'm sa

So you are saying his incessant questioning about why his privileges were yanked is responsible for his privileges being yanked?

That's a bit difficult to reconcile with the usual space-time continuum.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 02:24PM | 0 recs
The issues of polls on top of the page and banning

members or removing their rating abilities are one in the same?

by PJ Jefferson 2008-05-15 04:55PM | 0 recs
I'll just take the silence as complicity.

The problem with writing a diary about this particular topic is that the chance of it making the wreck list seems to be getting more and more improbable by the day. If the people who are directly affected by the practice cannot recommend the diary to show some community concern with getting an answer, then there's not much chance of resolution, thus follows wild speculation and tin foil hattery (i'm not immune to donning one occasionally).

by bookish 2008-05-15 01:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

George,

No one is accountable to you.

Go to Kos if you are not happy.

No one is stopping you.

The last time I checked, your name was not Barack.

by labanman 2008-05-15 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

What a good ole RNC tactic.
This isn't about me, its about the site.

The site is losing members and credibility very fast.

Plain and simple,  why is the ability to REC a diary a threat to this site?

Why did hundreds of people lose that ability, yet are still trusted users?

Why is Jerome so silent about it?

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/15/1427 30/254

Read that then get back to me.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

OMG.  Please just stop or go away!

by ChitownDenny 2008-05-15 02:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

dude don't you have your republican site to tend?

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-15 02:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

Uh huh.  Right after I troll rate you.

by ChitownDenny 2008-05-15 02:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

Another challenge to Jerome:

Jerome, I know you have received MANY emails about this republican who actively campaigns for John McCain.

He runs this trash GOP website:
http://777denny.wordpress.com/
http://777denny.wordpress.com/
http://777denny.wordpress.com/

Jerome, there is no way you aren't reading this.

This republican POS has been on your site for weeks.

You said anyone campaining for McCain would be banned instantly, yet this clown stays here and mocks all of us.

ChitownDenny,  I give you props.  Maybe the most sucessful Republican troll on the net.
If I could mojo you I would, fwiw it's worth you either are feared by the admin, or loved by them.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 02:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

HAHAHA!

by ChitownDenny 2008-05-15 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

This guy has some truly disgusting stuff on his site, I fee like I need another shower after reading his stuff.

Denny you are a sick individual

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-15 02:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

Jonathan looks through the hidden comments for banning, I rarely have done it.  Just don't have the time.  Nor do I sit around and ban or otherwise daily. But believe whatever you want.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:40PM | 0 recs
I think there's either

a problem with the site or there needs to be some clarification on the stratified disciplinary measures of MyDD. You could clear up a lot of confusion by answering one simple question:

Does one lose the ability to recommend diaries when they lose rating abilities for abuse (as determined by the administrators)?

I'll follow that up with what I think is a rather germane (but not pointed) rhetorical question:

If so, does it really make sense to do so in light of the fact that recommending diaries is allows only for positive input?

by bookish 2008-05-15 02:52PM | 0 recs
Re: I think there's either

"Does one lose the ability to recommend diaries when they lose rating abilities for abuse (as determined by the administrators)?"

Yes.

And yes, it makes sense as if users are unable to abide by the guidelines they lose privilages.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:59PM | 0 recs
That answers my question. Thanks.

I do think it's silly to lose that "privilage" (sic) since it's inherently positive, and denying it to people prevents them from being able to ease themselves back into the fold under the guidelines, but it's your world; we're just here to make it round.

by bookish 2008-05-15 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: I think there's either

Makes sense to me. People who hide-rate irresponsibly are not interested in being part of the community, they want to lower the discourse here. The diaries they recommend are unlikely to help build the community, so even their "positive" input is intended to be disruptive.

Auto-banning, which this site does not have, and rampant hide-rating are what destroyed the DKos community. MyDD does a reasonable job implementing Teresa Nielsen Hayden's advice on maintaining a decent conversation. As decent as possible for a political site hosting multiple views during a contentious primary.

by souvarine 2008-05-15 03:14PM | 0 recs
Re: I think there's either

People who hide-rate irresponsibly are not interested in being part of the community, they want to lower the discourse here.

Click on my name below and take a look at my few comments today (these are my only comments, since I have not been back in the several months since I was improperly banned and then hastily reinstated).  Look at the HR and the TR.  Are the HR and TR ratings responsible?  Should the user who made either rating be banned, or at least warned?

Is sarcasm a banning offense in these hinterlands?

by Sully Fick 2008-05-15 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: I think there's either

Given that it was kevin22262, a longtime and productive member, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. And since, given your comments, you have an ax to grind, his one hide rating may even be justified.

by souvarine 2008-05-15 05:00PM | 0 recs
Thank you (sincerely)

The clarity of your response and the context of your words could not speak more clearly to me.

It seems, to your view, that being irresponsible is not a matter of logic - it is a matter of tribalism.

For in a republic, who is "the Country"? Is it the Government which is for the moment in the saddle? Why, the Government is merely a servant - merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them. Who, then, is "the Country"? Is it the newspaper? Is it the pulpit? Is it the school superintendent? Why, these are mere parts of the country, not the whole of it; they have not command, they have only their little share in the command. They are but one in a thousand; it is in the thousand that command is lodged; they must determine what is right and what is wrong; they must decide who is a patriot and who isn't.

Who are the thousand - that is to say, who are "the Country"? In a monarchy, the king and his family are the country; in a republic it is the common voice of the people. Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak. And it is a solemn and weighty responsibility, and not lightly to be flung aside at the bullying of pulpit, press, government, or the empty catch-phrases of politicians. Each must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which isn't. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide it against your convictions is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let men label you as they may. If you alone of all the nation shall decide on a way, and that way be the right way accordng to your convictions of the right, you have done your duty by yourself and by your country - hold up your head. You have nothing to be ashamed of.

- Mark Twain, Papers of the Adam Family

Many thanks, souvarine, for judging me so completely - on so little evidence.  It confirms to me the symptoms of the disease that is destroying liberalism in this country.

Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.

- Mark Twain, Notebook (1902)

by Sully Fick 2008-05-15 05:43PM | 0 recs
Given my intercourse with Jerome

you realize I cannot recommend or rate, so all I can offer is:

:invisible 2-rate:

by bookish 2008-05-15 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Given my intercourse with Jerome

You are having intercourse with Jerome?

Hot!

All I can offer is Intertube-safe 2-rating intercourse.

;)

by Sully Fick 2008-05-15 06:30PM | 0 recs
Well, if you don't think

that there's selective enforcement, then you obviously have an agenda.

My rate ability was stripped for a single incident in which I abusively hide rated a user who had abusively hide rated another. I admit my own abuse while honestly assessing the other. I've been rated by that user since, so I know that there is clearly a double-standard for what constitutes abuse at MyDD.

And that's fine. Like I said, it's Jerome's world. But, because of the way it's managed, I'll be at MyDD until the truth of the campaign sinks in-solely to watch the rending of garments in this virtual train wreck-then I'll go back to spending all of my time at the credible sites I've been partially neglecting.

by bookish 2008-05-15 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Instead of bashing him for something this diar

Um Jerome, hello

NOONE who has ever had a positive thought of Obama would DARE to Zero rate anyone.

Thats how I lost my privledges the second time, I 0 rated some racist comment made by Percilius in your wonderful 1 line diary about Obama buying jeans.

So you really like this Denny guy dissing your site on a regular basis?

He is a huge TR abuser, and a republican.  

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 02:53PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

I hear you Jerome, but as I mentioned in my diary to which you are responding, it would be very helpful to have more information.

I believe it would contribute to the dialogue and analysis here.  I would say more now but I have to run off to a political meeting.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

do your own EV map.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-15 01:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Why don't you do your own EVMap?

So much quarterbacking.

Do your own EV map & reverse the numbers.

Put Barack on top & that should make you happy.

by labanman 2008-05-15 02:03PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Why should he, they should be the same.

by GeorgeP922 2008-05-15 02:06PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

No they should not be the same if he's using a different formula. I personally think electoral-vote.com has the best EV maps. I don't expect Jerome to conform to votemaster's formula any more than I expect votemaster to conform to Jerome's. But they are both useful sources of information.

by LakersFan 2008-05-15 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Well, this is to both you and Teresa....  maybe my meter is off, but I read the comment as a thanks to Jerome for explaining the metrics behind the maps at the top of the page....  

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-15 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Why the hell would I want a map with made up numbers?

As someone who tries hard to do honest political analysis, even as I support one of the candidates, I don't want a fake map.  I want something with detailed information about the sources used, so that we can discuss the results in a more intellectually deep manner.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

::invisible 2::

by jaiwithani 2008-05-15 02:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

The current map gives Illinois to McCain.

I suggest ignoring the whole thing as a safe methodology.

by David in NY 2008-05-15 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Whoops!

Suddenly, in the last 10 minutes, Illinois has flipped back to Obama!!!  Amazing!!  Sorta does undermine the whole project, though.

by David in NY 2008-05-15 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Whoops!

I'd still be interested to know on what basis Illinois was ever given to McCain.  In what world would such a poll be credible?

by David in NY 2008-05-15 01:24PM | 0 recs
In this world,

otherwise known as Bizarro Blog.

by McNasty 2008-05-15 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

LOL!

by The Animal 2008-05-15 02:06PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Well duh David, maybe you shouldn't have clicked IL red then...

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:20PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

LOL

by JDF 2008-05-15 03:18PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology
Why is Indiana in the Democratic column.
Do you really believe that Democrats can win
Indiana ?
As I know Indiana has not been won by a Democrat
in 50 Years.
by hpg 2008-05-15 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

what a lyin sack o shit you are

by cdnminer 2008-05-15 10:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Then change AR to blue for Hillary, as even the latest Rasmussen reports poll shows her winning there.

by American1989 2008-05-15 01:12PM | 0 recs
Fair enough

Plenty of people are using the maps as biblical proof of various candidates' support.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-15 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

But, if the latest poll is tied, then the result remains the same as the previous latest poll.

Why not use the "uncalled" option if the current poll is tied or within the margin of error?

Using the previous poll gives the state to someone who has declined (from leading to tied) since the previous polling point.

by TCQuad 2008-05-15 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Bingo.  You beat me to it.

Also - exactly how can you call the map "up to the minute" when the most recent state polls in some of these states were no doubt taken months ago?

In what sense "up to the minute"?

by TL 2008-05-15 01:28PM | 0 recs
It is a MyDD conspiracy!

How dare you use polling that is not favorable to The Brokered One!

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-05-15 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a MyDD conspiracy!

Helpful.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a MyDD conspiracy!

Your handle is frightening!

by Zeitgeist9000 2008-05-15 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a MyDD conspiracy!

I aim to strike fear in my fellow assholes.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a MyDD conspiracy!

Would give you a 2 if I could.

by Skaje 2008-05-15 02:23PM | 0 recs
Re: It is a MyDD conspiracy!

Thanks. Here's one for you, because I still can.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 03:03PM | 0 recs
that's more like it

by Skaje 2008-05-15 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: that's more like it

Congratulations, brown noser!

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 04:34PM | 0 recs
There should be a "tossup" category

Coloring a state red or blue based on a 1 point lead for a candidate in one poll is patently ridiculous.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-05-15 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: There should be a "tossup" category

Not ridiculous, but it's not a tool as it currently exists to determine which states are in play and which states aren't. It's not intended as such, I guess.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 01:18PM | 0 recs
Re: There should be a "tossup" category

If you click on the maps to manipulate them, between McCain and the Democrat there's an "uncalled" option that (as I stated above) could be used for the purposes of close races.

Specifically, races within the margin of error shouldn't be declared for one candidate or the other, but rather, more accurately, listed as "uncalled".

by TCQuad 2008-05-15 01:23PM | 0 recs
Re: There should be a "tossup" category

I agree with that.

by Black Anus 2008-05-15 01:30PM | 0 recs
agreed

The map has the capability of displaying a tie. Use it.

by wanderindiana 2008-05-15 02:00PM | 0 recs
Just one qualm

it seems to miss polls, like today there was a poll done by Ras. where Clinton is beating McCain her Iowa results got put up but not this one...

by Student Guy 2008-05-15 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Just one qualm

The major problem is that it's difficult to tell when the maps were updated. "Up-to-the-minute" isn't a set time (more of a "we're doing the best we can to stay current") and you never really know when the last time the admins checked on poll results.

I'd much rather see a set time when you could be sure that the results were accurate, with an occasional mid-day refresh if something major pops up.

by TCQuad 2008-05-15 01:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Just one qualm

We need a page listing which polls have been taken into account. This whole "just trust me, it's legit" thing is ridiculous. I expect better from CNN, let alone a reputable blog.

by jaiwithani 2008-05-15 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Just one qualm

Try any of the ones I listed in the entry.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Just one qualm

Yea, good point, updated daily by 9 AM would be better.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Just one qualm

Really, have you checked it since yesterday? That got put up this morning.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:24PM | 0 recs
I had checked it in the morning

and AR was in McCain's camp against Hillary.  Iowa got updated but AR didn't.

by Student Guy 2008-05-19 09:03PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

offtopic but - Anybody else see Kevin James on Hardball making a complete fool of himself? High comedy.

by spacemanspiff 2008-05-15 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Tweetie schooled that GOP shit bag...It was awesome!!!

by hootie4170 2008-05-15 01:36PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

He was an appeaser, and thats about all I know. /snark

by DreamsOfABlueNation 2008-05-15 02:09PM | 0 recs
Thanks

for clearing this up.

by kevin22262 2008-05-15 01:31PM | 0 recs
Here's how it appears to work

1) When you first log onto mydd, it populates the two maps with the most recent single poll for each state.

2) If you then click on the map and change it (for example, you don't believe that Hillary would lose WA to McCain), the numbers update to your settings - now it becomes like an EV calculator

3) The next time you log on, or refresh the page even, the counters go back to their poll-generated state.

by obsessed 2008-05-15 01:31PM | 0 recs
Thanks
I really appreciate the EV map. It is very interesting.  My one take away is if the election were held today Obama would win the popular vote because he would run up big margins in California, Illinois, New York and many smaller states like Washington, Minnesota, Vermont,etc., but he would lose the election because of McCains solid south (including Florida) all the border states (including Missouri), all the mountain states(not including Colorado), all the plains states, Alaska and throw in N.H. and all McCain needs is to win one of the three industrial states of Michigan, PA, or Ohio - Just one and he's President. Obama must win all three.
It's amazing the MSM is not reporting this electoral college advantage of McCains. What's also interesting is the states in play are not likely to change much. This race looks very well baked and it will come down to those three big states.
by minnehot1 2008-05-15 01:53PM | 0 recs
If...

If the election were held today, I doubt the results would much resemble either of these maps.  The main reason is that if the election were held today, everyone would've known about it and acted accordingly.  The candidates would've campaigned, and run their ads, the voters would've started paying attention, etc.  Since the election is not today, none of that has happened, people don't know, they haven't seen the campaigns yet, and the polls are not measuring anything like a real election.

There are other reasons, like the fact that these polls were taken on different days while the general election happens on one day, that they have different methodologies and different levels of accuracy, etc., but really, the fact that the election is not today (and the rest of what I said above) is the big thing.

by cos 2008-05-15 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: If...

A new poll finds that if the election were held today, 85% of voters would be surprised.

by Pragmatic Left 2008-05-15 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: If...
When you look at the polls in 2000 and 2004 for June 1st of those years and you will find that the November results matched them to a tee.
America remains a polarized nation and all this talk about each candidates putting the others states 'in-play' is simply not supported by the polling. No Democrat has ever won the Presidency without winning West Virginia - do you really think Obama will win West Virgina? Kentucky? Tenn.? Not a chance in hell no matter what happens. Same for all the states of the south, mountain states, plains states, etc.
This is a very well baked race.  As I said. It comes down to MI, PA, and OH.
by minnehot1 2008-05-15 05:44PM | 0 recs
What I really think

Obama will be the nominee.

He will win PA (Hillary would've too, but she won't be the nominee).  He'll likely win MI too.  I don't know about Ohio, that one's a toss-up.  Missouri, too: I think Obama can win it but I'm not predicting.

Obama will also swing Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa (these went for Bush in 2004).  He'll come close in Virginia but I don't think he'll get it.

Comparison to 2004: All the Kerry states, plus three (Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico) and possibly also Ohio and/or Missouri (but he wins without them anyway).

He will not win West Virginia, but neither would Clinton; that state has been getting gradually redder and the trend will continue.  New Hampshire is the flip side of that: getting gradually bluer.  That trend will also continue, and Obama will win it (Clinton would've won it too, if she were the nominee, which won't be the case).

I may be wrong about these predictions, but I feel pretty good about them, and they're certainly based on much more solid reasons than believing the current "who would you vote for if the election were held today?" poll numbers.

Also, I think this is a relatively pessimistic/"realist" prediction.  If things change, I think they're likely to change in favor of Democrats.  McCain won't have any surprising wins, but Obama might.  Surprise wins for Obama could be: Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, North Dakota, Arizona.

by cos 2008-05-24 07:00PM | 0 recs
Now, as for chances in hell

You comment doesn't say so outright, but you seem to imply that Clinton would win Kentucky.  So I'll say it outright: Not a chance in hell.  Kentucky would vote for the Republican no matter who we nominate.

Your comment also seems to imply, by saying it "comes down to" them, that Michigan and Pennsylvania would go red.  The idea that a state that Gore won by 5 points in 2000, and Kerry won by 4 points in 2004, and whose economy is sucking badly now, would somehow switch to the Republican this year of all years is... strange, to say the least.  Michigan is solid.  Pennsylvania was a little narrower: 4 points for Gore, only 2 for Kerry, but the case is similar there.  This is not the year that a Gore & Kerry state with a sucking economy is going to switch to the Republican.

by cos 2008-05-24 07:17PM | 0 recs
polls this far out mean nothing plus

looks like the supers are all moving to Obama

Maybe They know something you don't?

by hope monger 2008-05-15 02:12PM | 0 recs
Re: polls this far out mean nothing plus

No, they just see political cover that's all. Why do you think Edwards endorsed when he did and not before the NC primary. He got political cover. Can't blame him.

by RJEvans 2008-05-15 02:14PM | 0 recs
I don't understand, does that mean they

don't want to vote for Obama but because of "cover" they will?

uh, what?

by hope monger 2008-05-15 02:20PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Well, one change must be made and that is Arkansas.

Rasmussen has a new poll out today showing McCain beating Obama and Clinton beating McCain.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c ontent/politics/election_20082/2008_pres idential_election/arkansas/election_2008 _arkansas_presidential_election

by RJEvans 2008-05-15 02:13PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

McCain 57% Obama 33%
Clinton 53% McCain 39%

Ouch!!

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:26PM | 0 recs
fivethirtyeight has completely different numbers

go look and see:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

by RuralD 2008-05-15 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

Yea, he's got his own weighting system... I'd rather not have the bias.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:27PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

he makes accurate predictions, and all the polls  have their "own weighting system".

by RuralD 2008-05-15 02:34PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

But, if Jerome created a weighting system, would you call bias, or would you say it is accurate?

by RJEvans 2008-05-15 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

It'd be biased, they all are. That's why I have one that has no weighting.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

"all the polls  have their "own weighting system"."

haha, there's a good one.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-05-15 02:42PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

"all the polls  have their "own weighting system"."

haha, there's a good one."

Is this not true? Are you trying to make a point by being so juvenile?  Are you going to adopt the usual Clinton supporter position and accuse me of lacking parts of my genitalia?

But regardless  Mr. Armstrong, I smell something sour . . . could it be grapes?  your posts of the last couple weeks do have a distinct  . . . flavor.

by RuralD 2008-05-15 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

Oh you are so going to get it!   Ban in 3...2...1...

by obscurant 2008-05-15 03:15PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

"all the polls  have their "own weighting system"."

haha, there's a good one.

Maybe you should read up on how political polling works. Pollsters always compare the demographics of the respondents with the likely demographics of actual voters, and weigh the responses accordingly.

by koszul 2008-05-15 05:07PM | 0 recs
Re: fivethirtyeight has completely different numbe

I don't think "weighting system" accurately describes why fivethirtyeight shows Obama doing a little better than Clinton in its electoral map right now. The difference between the myDD map currently showing Clinton with 284 electoral votes and the fivethirtyeight result with her at 260.1 is not because someone made an arbitrary decision to color a state red or blue. In fact fivethirtyeight currently gives Clinton Arkansas, which the myDD map on my screen doesn't.

The difference is that instead of treating the smallest difference in a poll as something written in stone, fivethirtyeight converts poll numbers to percentages of how often the candidate leading in the poll can be expected to win. Clinton has recent, small leads in Florida, Minnesota, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington. If you say that means you expect her to win all of those states, you have the myDD number of 284. If you convert those leads to percentages of victory one can expect, you get 260.1. There's bias in both expectations, both systematic bias and random bias. It's not true that myDD has no bias. It has the bias of assuming that leading the latest poll means one can expect victory. One can quantify that bias if one is so inclined, but I don't imagine many people are. If one is, just go to fivethirtyeight, and the trends in the polls during this time that Clinton has had the advantage of being a quixotic candidate are clear. What do you suppose would happen if everyone turned on her as the frontrunner again?

It doesn't seem that we'll find out. That's up to superdelegates, of course. Most of the rest of us are just putting out words for recreation.  

by DavidCD 2008-05-15 03:29PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

One poll came out showing Obama and Clinton winning Indiana, and that instantly discounts every other poll showing them way behind.  But because hardly anyone bothers to poll Indiana, since it is safely red, that outlier remains the most "recent" poll to date.  You got to admit the fact that Indiana being blue, while states like Wisconsin and Michigan are red, just makes the whole counter inaccurate, misleading, and ultimately useless.

Remember when we had Obama losing New York, but winning North Dakota?

by Skaje 2008-05-15 02:27PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

I think the moral of this is, like the delegate counter, either do it properly or not at all.

I'm assuming good intentions here (probably naively) but many of the more acrimonious discussions here revolve around these tendentious metrics on the sidebars.

I'm sure it helps to generate posts and site traffic. But in a purportedly reality based community (and unlike recent front pages I don't make this comparison likely) it reminds me of the ethos of the current US administration.

by duende 2008-05-15 02:44PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Thanks for the explanation Jerome.

by gcensr 2008-05-15 02:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

I don't think there is any good way to show where the head-to-head race is now.  Anyone who spends time with these polls, for instance, will notice that the key reason for Obama's weakness in states like OH, PA, and FL, to the extent it exists, is this: fully half of all Clinton supporters are telling pollsters right now they'll vote for McCain, stay home, or don't know.  

Who thinks that will be true in November?  And, who knows, maybe that's how this will pan out.  But it's impossible to predict whether these numbers will hold up (and there's probably an asymetry here, approx. one-quarter of Obama supporters are telling pollsters they wouldn't vote for Clinton, but they're doing this in the context of expecting that Obama will win the race, eg. if Clinton actually won we don't know whether these numbers would go up, down, or stay the same).

If Clinton and Obama didn't have to contend with this problem of party unity, btw, what the polls actually suggest is that neither would have any problem winning Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida.

Another reason I suspect Obama's numbers are a bit low: pollsters generally norm their results to what occurred during the last election.  If Obama is the nominee, I suspect there will be greater turnout among two groups: African-Americans and voters under the age of 40.  Not expecting that older voters, white voters, etc., will turn out in greater numbers, because, well, their rate of voter participation in previous years was already pretty high.

And in fairness, if Clinton is the nominee another big question would be whether she could capture the votes of women who are indies and even Republicans (or, conversely, whether men who are currently slotted as "don't know" would break for McCain in a big way).

There are plenty of "x factors" here (unlike in 2004, when Bush and Kerry fought for a small percentage of undecided voters throughout most of the year).

My hunch, btw, is that the lay of the land is so favorable to Dems this year the only way they'll lose is if they effectively beat themselves (ie. a large fraction of core Dems stay home).  

by IncognitoErgoSum 2008-05-15 03:07PM | 0 recs
Just a suggestion
The way the maps appear not only looks "weird", because it doesn't look at all like the US, but it's darn small to boot. Not all of us have the eyes of some of you young people.

And what exactly is the point of making a low number electoral state so dang teeny-tiny, and why do you need to graph each state with the same number of little squares as electoral votes? Makes it doubly hard to view.

Can't you just have a "standard" looking map without all the graph lines?

My two cents.

by DemsRising 2008-05-15 03:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Just a suggestion

Click on the bottom banner of the map for a full screen version. The EV scaling makes the weight of large but low-population states clearer.

by souvarine 2008-05-15 03:19PM | 0 recs
Thanks!
Too bad the larger screen obliterates the front page.

Next suggestion then? Could they make the larger screen a pop-up instead? That would be nice.

by DemsRising 2008-05-15 03:36PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

I'm back from my political meeting now and have to respond on the map.

So we're told that this is how they did it in 2004.  Well, a whole lot has changed in internet land since 2004. So what was groundbreaking then is absolutely behind the times, like a crank auto would be at a motor show.

The problem is that when you look at the map, no one knows what polls were used, if they were ones that have a good track record, what the sample size was, when the polling was done -- basically NOTHING.

Over 90% wants this change.  Some who have spoken out against it imply that I've asked for a biased presentation. I have not.  

And if some can't distinguish between their own political views and a hard-headed, clear-eyed analysis of data, then, well, I guess that explains the very strange arguments that get made sometimes.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-15 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

To me this:

This Electoral Vote Map is updated constantly to forecast the 2008 Presidential election based on the latest available state polling.

is more transparent than this:

Firstly, we assign each poll a weighting based on that pollster's historical track record, the poll's sample size, and the recentness of the poll.  More reliable polls are weighted more heavily in our averages.  Secondly, we include a regression estimate for each state among our 'polls', which helps to account for outlier polls and to stabilize the results.  Thirdly, we simulate the election 10,000 times for each site update, in order to provide a probabilistic assessment of electoral outcomes.

I can quickly and easily go to RealClearPolitics.com or Pollster.com and confirm that what is on the widgets is in fact the most recent poll. And I can decide for myself whether to trust that poll.

Poblano's massaging and hand-waving gives people a false confidence in his results. It is basically glorified poll averaging with a bunch of extra steps to obscure his biasing of Western (Obama) states. But he does do a great job presenting an awful lot of information.

by souvarine 2008-05-15 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

Check his record on predicting results, then compare it to any pollster or aggregator of your choice.

"Pro-Obama" is just a fancy word for accurate, since Obama usually ends up winning.

by KyleJRM 2008-05-15 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: The MyDD EV Map methodology

I'm very familiar with poblano's record. Look at NH, NV, Super Tuesday. He is making similar mistakes with his GE averaging.

Yeah, when the demographics are clear poblano does as well as BTD does with his back-of-the-envelope calculations.

by souvarine 2008-05-15 08:01PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads