Do I really need to school and embarrass you some more. The fact you have not even looked at the tool and claim to be able to refute it is ****ing hilarious.
So, Nate Silver is a blogger. He does not run election coverage, he runs a blog. Richard Stevenson runs election coverage. This is what is known as a fact. No amount of claiming otherwise is going to change that.
It's hard to "school" someone who obviously knows more than you...
Especially when your entire argument is that I havent "used the tool"... I have looked it over, and disagree with it's analysis... There's a difference...
Again, I showed you, that;
1) it ignores that Romney will likely win 1 electorate from ME, in the 2nd congressional district, which the 3 polls from 2 agencies have Romney up 5pts there. That means there's a 2pt swing on the results in that tool.
2) it ignores the paths from just as likely scenarios. You say agreed upon swing states... but it RCP has NC, MI, and PA all at a 3.8pt spread (with NC having been steady, but PA and MI polls closing), why is it they decided to include NC, but not PA and MI...
Because of NATE starING SILVER's POLLING!!!
Nate Silver doesn't "run a blog"... he also runs a polling average agency, which the NY Times has been relying upon for its coverage... Nate Silver's polling average agency doesn't just look at the polls and provide an average though, but he applies computer model predictions from economic indicators and other considerations.
Yet, that's what the NY Times used as a guide for what it considers are the swing states... ignoring others...
The list of states is a common choice of swing states. No other states are as close in the polls for the last month. The only relevant fact to the tool is how many electoral votes are available in the state. This is something you would know if you actually had looked at it instead of being incensed since you did not like the conclusion.
As I just said, I've used to tool, I just think it's wrong, by mistaken analysis...
The relevant facts are, that it awards 4 delegates to Obama for Maine, when Maine allocates 2 of their electors by congressional district and all information gathered on Maine has Romney winning the 2nd congressional district. So that makes the configuration of this "tool" that you are so in love with OFF BY 2PTS!!!
That's not even considering swing states... That's considering 3 polls in October by 2 different agencies all came up with a 5 pt Romney lead in the 2nd congressional district...
Then, as I said, there are other issues, in what consideration for a swing state is...
the latest polls MI tied and PA narrowing... for that matter MN narrowing as well...
They're swing states, RCP has them as swing states, other polling agencies list them as swing states...
If this tool wanted to be better, they would've listed all the states that are potential swing states as swing states...
Instead they chose to push a bias that is predicated by Nate Silver's polls...
You did claim that. You went off on this long rant about east coast states being first...
Your scenario...did you know you can model it with this tool? of course you did not because you just went on a knee jerk rant instead of actually looking at the tool.
No, what I said was if Romney comes out and wins the first few states, and they're decided early, it's a sign that Romney is winning, and that the western states will swing to Romney and add to the wins on the east coast to put him over the top...
The fact that you call it a "long rant" and then can't accurately convey the sentiment I gave shows that you didn't read what I wrote, so you can't comment...
For someone who claims I haven't used "the tool"... you surely haven't read the comments I've written on it and commented in regards to that...
Seriously, it gives swing states because those are the ones that we do not know the likely outcome in. Sure, Romney could win NY and California, but it is highly unlikely and adding those two would up the complexity of the programming of the tool immensely.
Right... Romney winning CA or NY is highly unlikely...
But... Rasmussen (one of the most accurate polling agencies) has polls tied in MI and OH, and a 2 pt lead in PA for Obama...
Those are well within the margin of error and within reach for Romney...
Especially considering that there are about 4-5% listed as undecided... and late breaking undecideds have gone 80% to 20% against every incumbent running for re-election... so that would mean a 3/4-1 advantage for Romney... and 2-3 pt leads could easily disappear...
MI, PA, and MN are all trending downwards and are under 4pts...
Actually you did say it, it was a direct ****ing quote.
And for gods sake learn what assumptions are. Assuming those states are the states in play(probably true), then if Obama wins FLA and NC it is in fact all over.
Crying because the electoral math favors Obama is not going to change the fact that the electoral math favors Obama. Does that mean Obama is going to win? Of course not. It does mean that the odds are in Obama's favor however. Crying, lies, prevarication and whining about bias is not going to change that.
Yes... I accurately pointed out that there is a major flaw in this "tool" that you swear your life by... that the fact that they already are 2 pts off at their starting point, given ME's 2nd congressional district, and that there are other paths they haven't given credit to, when they are realistic ones...
You still don't want to admit it... but...
Here are the last 3 polls from PA
Trib poll shows presidential race in Pennsylvania remains too close to call | TribLIVE
READ THE RESULTS: Muhlenberg College/Morning Call 2012 Pennsylvania Presidential Election Survey - mcall.com
Public Opinion Polls and Market Research : Final Pennsylvania Poll Results
That's 3 polls, 1 tied, 1 2pts, 1 3pts...
So, like it or not... PA is in play... and closing...
BTW... let's compare that with the last 3 polls in NC...
Public Opinion Polls and Market Research : Final North Carolina Presidential Poll Shows...
WRAL News poll: Romney edges ahead in NC as election nears :: WRAL.com
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_FLNC_1105.pdf
That's 3 polls, 1 tied, 2 with 4pts...
So in the last week... the 3 polls regarding PA and NC has PA closer than NC...
yet, Nate Silver doesn't consider it a swing state... so the NY Times tool doesn't give it as a path to victory for Romney, when it truly is...