Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
[
Whoa there! You're much to quick to write Romney off. Look at the last three Presidential elections in Wisconsin. Gore and Kerry barely won with less than .5% of the vote, then Obama won with 14% of the vote. Now, Obama has a small 2 point lead. You know what that means? Disenfranchised supporters. Since 2008 the mood in Wisconsin has been away from Obama, and the recall election a few months ago shows that support in Wisconsin has trended in favor of the GOP. Don't put so much stock an a poll that returns results well within the margin of error. Take a look at the bigger picture.
Gerrymandering can't effect the results of an at large, state wide vote.
Gerrymandering can't effect the results of an at large, state wide vote.
Princeton Election Consortium Oct. 27 Analysis
Princeton's current prediction is Obama 297 EV, Romney 241 EV, with a Meta-margin of Obama +1.96%. The Meta-margin is the "amount by which polls must swing overall to create a perfect toss-up," i.e., the combined state by state differences in the polling of the candidates
As Professor Wang explains,
"To calculate this snapshot, we (a) use recent polls for each state (3 polls or 7 days, whichever is greater) to calculate the probability that one candidate is ahead, (b) calculate the exact distribution of all 2^51 = 2.3 quadrillion outcomes, measured in terms of electoral votes (EV), and (c) take the median of the distribution to get the expected EV count." Princeton actually does two types of predictions, one called the "Random Drift" and the other the "Bayesian prediction." The first assumes that opinion is equally likely to move in either direction; under the Random Drift theory, Obama's odds of winning are "only" 89%.
Under the Bayesian model, the assumption is that the Meta-Margin "is more likely to move towards its average (Obama +3.1+/-1.3%) than away from it. This has been the case in past elections." Professor Wang thinks the 97% odds under the Bayesian model is more accurate, but provides both:
The Presidents chance of winning now at 97%!
Princeton Election Consortium Oct. 27 Analysis
Princeton's current prediction is Obama 297 EV, Romney 241 EV, with a Meta-margin of Obama +1.96%. The Meta-margin is the "amount by which polls must swing overall to create a perfect toss-up," i.e., the combined state by state differences in the polling of the candidates
As Professor Wang explains,
"To calculate this snapshot, we (a) use recent polls for each state (3 polls or 7 days, whichever is greater) to calculate the probability that one candidate is ahead, (b) calculate the exact distribution of all 2^51 = 2.3 quadrillion outcomes, measured in terms of electoral votes (EV), and (c) take the median of the distribution to get the expected EV count." Princeton actually does two types of predictions, one called the "Random Drift" and the other the "Bayesian prediction." The first assumes that opinion is equally likely to move in either direction; under the Random Drift theory, Obama's odds of winning are "only" 89%.
Under the Bayesian model, the assumption is that the Meta-Margin "is more likely to move towards its average (Obama +3.1+/-1.3%) than away from it. This has been the case in past elections." Professor Wang thinks the 97% odds under the Bayesian model is more accurate, but provides both:
The Presidents chance of winning now at 97%!
Princeton Election Consortium Oct. 27 Analysis
Princeton's current prediction is Obama 297 EV, Romney 241 EV, with a Meta-margin of Obama +1.96%. The Meta-margin is the "amount by which polls must swing overall to create a perfect toss-up," i.e., the combined state by state differences in the polling of the candidates
As Professor Wang explains,
"To calculate this snapshot, we (a) use recent polls for each state (3 polls or 7 days, whichever is greater) to calculate the probability that one candidate is ahead, (b) calculate the exact distribution of all 2^51 = 2.3 quadrillion outcomes, measured in terms of electoral votes (EV), and (c) take the median of the distribution to get the expected EV count." Princeton actually does two types of predictions, one called the "Random Drift" and the other the "Bayesian prediction." The first assumes that opinion is equally likely to move in either direction; under the Random Drift theory, Obama's odds of winning are "only" 89%.
Under the Bayesian model, the assumption is that the Meta-Margin "is more likely to move towards its average (Obama +3.1+/-1.3%) than away from it. This has been the case in past elections." Professor Wang thinks the 97% odds under the Bayesian model is more accurate, but provides both:
Do you honestly believe this?
Do you honestly believe this?
I believe it more than I believe Romney is winning Ohio.
Do you honestly believe this?
I believe it more than I believe Romney is winning Ohio.
I think there are people that feel let down by Obama. There will be people that voted for him without knowing anything about him, who now feel that the change he was referring to was not in the best interest of this country.
Obama didn't want to wear the American flag on his lapel.
Romney waves the flag freely.
I think Romney's concern for America is more genuine. I don't see him holding million dollar dinners at the White house in this financially strapped economy.
Captain Magic Underpants ?
Does that mean I can call Obama President Biglips ?
Captain Magic Underpants ?
Does that mean I can call Obama President Biglips ?
His ears are a more attractive target if you're going for aesthetics.
