We’ve reached a new phase in the campaign now where I can begin to look at a few new things to help provide added context to the poll numbers. Before I start here, I want to tell you that I do believe that the average of polls is probably going to be accurate nationally and in individual states. This will probably be truest of the most robust (weighted) averages that take into account individual poll bias and history, like Nate Silver’s analysis. So, if Nate Silver is saying, for example, that Obama is going to lose Florida, I am not going to make up some magic argument for why he is wrong. At most, I’ll show you some reason to hope he’s wrong.
There are two states I want to discuss in that vein today. The first is Nevada. Nate Silver projects that Obama will win the state 50.6%-48.2%. That’s pretty close. I think Obama may very well do much better than that. The reason is, of course, the ground game. It has paid enormous dividends.
The final voter registration report is here. And here’s what’s in it:
– Statewide, Nevada Democrats now have a 90,187 raw vote advantage. And yes, that makes for a 7.17% advantage. Back in March, Democrats only had about a 4% statewide edge. And it was even smaller earlier this year.
– In Washoe County, Republicans’ voter registration edge has narrowed even further. It’s now a mere 1,169 raw votes, or 0.005%. In March, Republicans had a 1.76% edge.
– In Clark County, Democrats are closing with a 127,471 raw vote lead, or a 14.96% advantage. In March, Democrats had an 11.68% advantage countywide.
– In NV-03, Democrats are closing with a 7,066 raw vote lead, or a 2.11% edge. In March, Republicans actually had a tiny 0.01% edge.
– In NV-04, Democrats are closing with a 41,094 raw vote lead, or a 13.27% advantage. In March, Democrats had a 9.91% advantage.
This is the Obama for America machine in action. They absolutely crushed the Republicans in “anytime, anywhere” voter registration, wiping out or reversing GOP advantages in federal and state districts throughout the state. And they are very ready to get these new voters to the polls. What’s unclear is whether or not the pollsters are accounting for this boomlet in their likely voter screens.
That’s also a question people should be asking about in North Carolina. The polls have been looking grim there lately and Nate Silver is only giving Obama a 17% chance of winning the state. That means he probably will not win the state. But let’s take a look at something.
North Carolina began in-person early voting on Thursday, and oh what a difference a day makes. In one day, over 150,872 people voted in-person, which is the Democrats preferred method of early voting in North Carolina. The party registration numbers were upended. As of Wednesday, registered Republicans outnumbered Democrats 52 percent to 27 percent and as of Thursday, Democrats outnumber Republicans 47 percent to 35 percent. But before we call North Carolina for Obama, registered Democrats had healthy early vote leads in 2008 and 2004.
North Carolina has an innovation unavailable elsewhere. In-person early voting is called “one stop” voting in the state because a person can register and vote all in one stop at an early voting polling location. Over 100,000 people took advantage of this in 2008. Unregistered voters don’t even make registered voter poll screens, much less likely voter screens. It will be worthwhile to watch if one stop voting moves the North Carolina polling as early voting progresses.
In this case, you can look back at 2008 and the 100,000 voters who registered to vote when they went to vote, and you can assume that at least that many people will do the same this year. And none of those voters should get through a likely voter screen.
To be more precise, only those newly registered voters who have already voted (since voting started on Wednesday) are going to get counted in polls. None of them are likely to have been contacted in the polls we’re seeing today, and if they were, they weren’t counted because they weren’t registered.
Everyone knows that Obama has the superior ground game but the advantage they can get out of their ground game varies according to the rules in each state. In North Carolina, anyone who is eighteen can be dragged off the street and brought to a polling place where they can register and vote. That makes having a stronger ground game a much bigger advantage than it is here in Pennsylvania where we have no early voting and registration closed over two weeks ago.
So, I will be keeping my eye on early voting numbers in a few states and I’ll be making comparisons to 2008 to see if Obama is performing better or worse than he did last time around. Some states are more likely to surprise the pollsters than others, and Nevada and North Carolina are at the top of that list.
Obama led early voting in Ohio in 2008, 42 to 22. This year so far, he’s only up 36 to 29, and the gap is closing.
That’s worrisome but in 2008 every Democrat was registered as a Democrat because they voted in the primary.
This year, the only real primary was between Santorum and Romney, and a lot of Dems crossed over to have a say. They are being counted as Republicans now.
Ohio doesn’t have party registration, so you’re listed as a Dem or Republican based on the last partisan primary you voted in.
Not saying not to worry, but the numbers would be down even if all other things were equal.
No link, no dates, no facts. Par for the course for the troll.
but elicited useful info from Booman.
His first comment to survive the onslaught of donuts.
I posted some youtube faves for you on the other thread
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/263163-poll-romney-gaining-ground-in-ohio
While I agree that I’m confident about Nevada, I’m much less so other places.
We’ve seen evidence by the 2nd day of early voting in NC that GOP has closed the gap considerably. Additionally, the gap is much smaller in OH than it was in 2008 – and poll numbers there are tightening (PPP had a 1-point lead – not good).
I wasn’t happy after the first debate, but never thought the victory was truly in danger. I do now.
Feel free to talk me down or tell me I’m wrong!
In Illinois, this is called GRACE PERIOD VOTING.
if you know anyone who missed the 10/9 REGISTRATION DEADLINE and still wants to vote:
tell them to use GRACE PERIOD REGISTRATION.
they register and vote at the same time.
It’s going on until November 3rd.
If you’re in Illinois,
EARLY VOTING BEGINS MONDAY, OCTOBER 22.
Really glad to have the “grace voting” information for my nephew who just turned 18 and said he wasn’t going to register to vote, and the regular deadline has passed. Glad to know it’s not too late if he changes his mind.
I early voted in Illinois last week, so I don’t think your Oct 22 date is correct.
He’ll win Nevada by a greater number than polling suggests, methinks. 2008 polling in Nevada was off by a significant margin. In fact, in 2008, my model said he wouldn’t decisively win there. Yet he did. In fact, Obama won NV by 12.5; polling had him at 6.5.
I’m not confident he’ll win NC. When you were talking landslide, I didn’t think he’d win NC or IN. But I had him winning the rest. That includes Florida. We shall see.
I will admit that Colorado has me slightly worried, though.
Has anyone seen a comprehensive analysis of the House races out there yet? I’ve had trouble finding one, maybe because there’s just not enough polling. But I’d like to know whether we have any shot at a House majority at this point.
What I want to know is what exactly is causing this polling shift. Are they really tightening up their screens? Did the debates, especially the first one, really matter that much? Is there something else that we’re missing?
I don’t think there’s much polling. The experts (who are apparently credible when it comes to calling wave elections beforehand, even if they can’t precisely say which specific seats will always be casualties) seem to think there’s a far more narrow slate of contestable districts in the wake of the post-2010 realignments.
I know the Democrats are gonna do great in Illinois and California, enough to damn near wipe out the GOP in both states. Around the rest of the country, I’m less confident.
Koch Brothers are blizzarding the airwaves in Illinois with negative ads on Dem Congressional candidates, saying they outsource jobs to China, Obamacare is gutting Medicare, any shit they can make up. Negative ads always have an effect. Why else would those Ohio voters be saying Romney is better for the economy?
Just look at the ads against Bill Foster, it’s so much crap that WGN wouldn’t even air it.
Yes. Outright lies about outsourcing to China.
Nonsense. You should follow The People’s View’s (and others of their ilk) sterling example and throw a weeks-long hissy-fit about how Nate is part of the New York Times MEDIA CONSPIRACY to bring Obama down, even though he’s (gasp) calling the President a 70% favorite for reelection and has never found him trailing Romney even for a single day.
On a different note, remember when you were going on and on about McGovern and Mondale and how the Romneybot was the worst candidate in the history of the modern world? That was fun. Between that and hopping on-board the brokered convention bandwagon, have you given any thought as to why you so severely underestimated his basic, generic competency as a candidate? In a deeply polarized world, huge amounts of money can compensate for toxicity as long as you don’t vigorously trash women voters in public. It also helps that the President remains black.
I can’t wait until around Saturday, November 3rd, when I predict that Nate Silver’s “model” will miraculously reduce Obama’s odds of winning from 70-30 to 50-50!
Romney’s lead among Independents averages about 8 percentage points in the poll average…identical to Obama’s edge in 2008…does anyone here actually believe Obama will win this election while losing the Independent vote by 8 points?
Concern trolling earns donuts.
Yes, I do. How? By huge voter turnout. Hispanic registration is up big time and black voters are really mad at Romney’s trash.
He is a terrible candidate. No one likes him.
As for the brokered convention, aside from the fact that I liked to poke the Republicans with that stick and entertain folks, to the degree I was serious about it being a possibility, I never said it was probable.
I just pointed out that Romney wasn’t going to get 50% of the delegates if he kept getting 30% of them, which was kind of obvious.
Why is Romney doing as well as he is? The economy, combined with a lot of neurotoxins paid for by billionaires and broadcast all across this country. And the president is still black. And he apparently let Romney alpha dog him at the first debate, which is a no-no in Big Dick Politics.
You forgot one important fact about why Romney is is neck-and-neck…
Deep down, Obama really doesn’t want to be the President any longer.
Which would be very compelling evidence if we only ever elected likable people in this country. Richard Nixon says hello.
Your exuberant predictions about 60/40 elections were always premised on the President winning a percentage of white votes that he will never be allowed to win. It’s a bummer, but it is what it is.
I was hoping he could improve on 08 and get maybe 55% tops nationwide on the strength of Latinos and women voters, but it looks like we’ll have to settle for 51-52%. So it goes.
I’m more disappointed that the allegedly greatest organizational/turnout machine ever conceived doesn’t seem to offer any particular advantage at winning House swing races. We’re on the verge of Congress wasting six full years of the President’s terms on complete bullshit.
BJ, do you still stand by your prediction of the Prez as a 100% lock for re-election?
Most definitely. 100%. He will win Ohio and Iowa and Nevada, and he will therefore win the electoral college.
And if he fails to win many other swing states and only brings in 280-300 EC votes, it will have been a massive collapse compared to what could have been, and nobody associated with his campaign will ever be called a genius again.
But Obama will still be president.
I am in Nevada and I am very confident that Obama will win by at least a slightly larger margin than Nate Silver’s model shows. The Democrats have an excellent ground game that they work on year-round and the Republicans have been in disarray as a party since 2008 when the Paulites and the Tea Party freaks got into a tug-of-war and tore it apart. And they can’t get it back together with such a shitty candidate as Romney. Not nearly as many Romney bumper stickers as there were for McCain/Palin, either. Loyal Republicans will vote religiously without any prompting but disenchanted ones (especially those who insist on calling themselves Independent nowadays) may not vote at all. Let’s hope something happens soon to really demoralize them because early voting started today.
They don’t ask about religion in the polling I’ve seen, but I think even the Mormons around here are split on Romney. But they are behind Heller, from what I can gather. They are not married to one party but they do vote. And Heller (who even hides from the Republican brand) has kept his distance from Romney while Reid has openly condemned Romney as a Bad Mormon.
Shelley Berkley probably won’t win the Senate seat without an Act of (the Mormon) God.
The Latinos that vote are energized and they understand the importance of keeping Obama in office. White voters are split. Other ethnic groups are pretty tiny but would vote as you would expect nationally.
Early voting is really convenient. You go to any of the locations in your county and they look you up on a laptop, prepare a smart-card “ballot” for your precinct and you vote. Locations are at major shopping centers, libraries and grocery stores. The counties report which voters cast ballots to the parties every day through early voting so they can take you off of the call lists. OFA calls to politely remind committed voters until they have voted and for certain groups like college students, they’ll track them down in person at their dorm if necessary to get that vote.
These are only my thoughts based purely on anecdotal evidence. So, not scientific.
“White voters are split”?!
Romney is on pace to receive the largest percentage of the White vote since Reagan in 84.
Bullshit. Eat your donut.
Donuts?
Did you see today’s Real Clear Politics? Polls indicate that Romney is on pace to get the largest percentage of the white vote since Reagan in 84…
And it’s still not going to be enough to save Romney, because this isn’t 1984.
Which goes to show that racism is alive and well in this country.
I’m never going to buy a North Carolina victory. Last time was a total fluke brought on by poor economic conditions. Anyhow, as for Nevada you forgot to mention Nate’s own discussion of hispanic/latino voters. The pollsters who conduct polls in Spanish are projecting a higher turnout of latino/hispanic voters, 70% as opposed to 60% IIRC.
Nate’s not including those in his calculations because he’s not sure if it’s accurate or not. But if they WERE Nevada would look much different.
For the sake of downticket races, I hope you are wrong on NC. But at the moment, I have no way to tell. But Charlotte will play big, which is why the GOP has trotted out pro-fracking former Charlotte mayor Pat Mcrory to run for governor again. And another two years of GOP dominance of the legislature will return NC to the economic status of other Southern states.
If anything, where I live is more intensely pro-Obama than it was four years ago. But its role has always been to put narrow elections over the top for Democrats. And it will not affect the Congress or the legislature one whit–unless a disaster happens.
I think that Nate’s consistency in not changing his model is what is going to be important. Post-election, the way the model is constructed will adjust for any significant changes in electoral dynamics in US politics.
How do the pollsters account for early voters? After all, an early voter is 100% a voter whereas a “likely voter” voter is only what – 50-90% probability they will actually vote? – Help me out here. On the “a bird in the hand is worth two in the Bush” theory, early voters should nearly be weighted double registered voters who haven’t voted, and almost double for “likely” voters.
They ask if you’ve already voted early/absentee. If so, they record it as such. You’ll see it in polling results.
yea but shouldn’t an actual vote be weighted higher than an intended vote?
I don’t think it is but it will be noted as a side note what percent of those are already cast. Nate Silver’s model probably adds more weight to it though, somehow. His model is pretty deep – more than just an average of polls.
This is exactly why likely vote screens will skew Democrat over the next few weeks–Dems are much more likely to vote early. That’s why you have some national polls showing 8 or 9 point advantage for Dems on voter identification–08 was a Dem watershed, and they only had a 7 point advantage! At best, voter ID will resort to the historical mean of plus 3…
Hey! You said something intelligent! Keep up the good work. Soon you will start thinking more and more. Maybe you will even stop listening to the Fat One.
This is not snark. I’m optimistic. I would have given you a 4 if you had not said so many offensive things in the past. Continue, Nick. Once you get your brain off Republican propaganda it feels good to think, doesn’t it?
Thanks…I think?
Who do you think will win Ohio?
If Romney doesn’t win Ohio, he’ll need some combination of Colorado, Iowa and/or New Hampshire, and…Wisconsin. Is Wisconsin an easier win for Romney than Ohio?
Wisconsin is much easier than Ohio. Wisconsin has been heading Right for some time as evidenced by Scott Walker’s election and defeat of the recall.
I thought Ohio was in the bag for Ohio, but those recent polls have me doubting. Back in 2004, some DailyKos blogger said that Ohio is five states wrapped into one. The Urban areas are all different and the Southern rural area might as well be in Dixie. Reference Missouri, where Saint Louis and Kansas City are Democratic strongholds and Springfield is Republican as is the rural areas. Too bad. I thought about retiring to Central Missouri. The climate is nice, like Southern Germany/Northern Italy. Ethnically it’s congenial to me. I liked seeing all those Italian names on business signs. Property is cheap and people really did seem friendly (to white people anyway). But I just couldn’t live in a Bible thumping red area.
Surely you cannot select a retirement location based on political affiliation…as a radical right-winger, I’m deciding between coastal Maine and coastal Oregon, both Blue bastions!
Not solely but partially.
Not so fast. Democrats like early in-person voting, where available. Republicans are big on absentee mail-in ballots, where available – and they have been for a long time.
Turnout today in Nevada’s Democratic-heavy Clark Country crazy high on first day of voting. No word on other areas, yet.