So ...

I have fed today's 5-million-word blog post by Nate Silver to my beastly Yada-Yada Essence Condenser and here's what's left:

[A]lthough [Romney's] made gains, he does not seem to have taken the lead in very many state polls. That trend, if anything, has become more entrenched. Of the half-dozen or so polls of battleground states published on Wednesday, none showed Mr. Romney ahead; the best result he managed was a 48-48 tie in a Rasmussen Reports poll of New Hampshire.

That last part brings a smile; even Rasmussen couldn't cook up anything better than a tie.

Comments

[Chad]

Nate Silver's analysis seems to assume that the national polling results are inconsistent with the results from the battleground states. Yet we've known, for quite a while, that the electoral college (huzzah countermajoritarianism!) favors Obama this year. (And before anyone gets all Jonathan Bernstein-y on me: November 3 is sufficiently proximate that we should start actually looking at state polls, rather than assuming that national swings will be replicated state by state.)

What if Obama were reelected with less than a majority of the popular vote? That would be misanthropically fun, would it not? (/wrists)

[Robert Lipscomb]

PM, clearly you did not sufficiently understand the underlying principle of Petr G's comment about "... exciting modern developments in Bistromathics and Quantum Economics. Have you never heard of Schrodinger's Deficit ...".

I suspect Rasmussen might be employing the University of Tennessee universal conversion factor: multiply your answer by zero and add the correct number.

I can't speak for polling, but in engineering it helps to be sitting next the smart kids while taking the test. in rasmussen's case, all the smart kids seem to be employed by Fox News.

[Joe the writer]

Two questions: Have you considered licensing or better yet selling the Yada-Yada Essence Condenser? I could use it my work and to speed up my online reading. Also, does it come with a bull-pucky detector?