Reëlection Watch: October 27, 2012
Each week brings an ever increasing flood of data. For this reason, today is the last weekly version of Reëlection Watch. Starting next week, Reëlection Watch and Senate Watch will be combined in a format that will appear for the last three slots prior to the election.
What’s the latest news? Let’s dive in and see.
National Polls
Since October 15, in the national popular vote matchup of President Barack Obama versus Republican nominee Mitt Romney, the Republican has led in more polls than he has trailed, though by a 2:1 ratio, which has converged to a national lead of just under a point. As I’ve noted before, and will note again, the national polls are to the right of the state polls, and state polls have historically been more accurate than their national counterparts. Nonetheless, the President’s national poll position is now 2.5 points behind President George W. Bush’s on this date eight years ago, and 9.5 points below his position four years ago.
Since the first Presidential debate, Obama and Romney have been effectively tied in their favorability polls.
For the third week, the national polls suggest that Obama might lose the upcoming election.
As of yesterday, Intrade had Obama at 63, up a point from last week.
Overall, things on the national level remain sketchy for the President.
Early Voting
Early voting is now available in all states. The green states are accepting absentee ballots, but not early in-person ballots, while the gold states are accepting both.

Sixteen states allow in-person voting today; of the battleground states, this includes Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Michigan and Virginia don’t offer early in-person voting.
North Carolina’s mail voting has favored Republicans by a two-to-one ratio, but their early in-voting has favored Democrats by about the same ratio. Both forms have had roughly the same number of votes, 150,000 each. That’s about eight percent of the 2008 total.
Florida’s mail voting has been closer, with Republicans leading Democrats by four points.
The Electoral College
Here’s what the Electoral College looks like, based on current polling data:

Here are the key states, from reddest to bluest:
- North Carolina was polled three times in the past week. Rasmussen has Romney up by six, Public Policy Polling sees a tie, and Grove found Obama up by three. Because this is indicative of a momentum shift, but it’s probably too little, too late, North Carolina moves to “Leans Romney”. Intraders give Romney an 80 percent chance of carrying the Tarheel State, unchanged from last week. Nate Silver gives Romney an 81 percent chance here.
- Florida got polled four times in the past week. Angus Reid and Gravis found Romney ahead by five points and one point, respectively, while Mellman sees the race as tied and Grove saw a two point lead for the President. Accounting for house bias, Romney still has a small polling lead. Florida stays “Likely Romney”, based on the consistency of pro-Romney polls in the Sunshine State, the trend in Romney’s direction, and the systemic advantage Romney already enjoys. Floridians have been able to vote for nearly a month. Intraders give Romney a 72 percent chance of picking up Florida’s 29 electoral votes, up eight from last week. Nate’s model is less confident, giving Romney “only” a 65 percent chance. Were it not for the systemic advantage, I’d agree with Nate’s number. With that advantage, the Intrade market looks closer to the truth to me.
- Virginia was polled six times this past week. Wenzel Strategies, Rasmussen, and Fox News all find Romney ahead by two points. Mellman sees Obama ahead by one, while Public Policy Polling’s two polls came away with Obama up by two and five points. The more recent has the bigger lead. All in all, it’s still close enough to keep Virginia a “Tossup”, though it looks a little better for Obama this week than it did last week. Virginians have been able to vote for quite a while now. The Intrade market has Romney at 58 percent, up seven from a week ago. Nate’s model disagrees, giving Obama a 54 percent chance. I think Nate’s is the more likely number.
- Colorado had five polls published this week. Rasmussen was the only one to see a Romney lead, at four points. NBC/Marist saw the race tied. Keating Research, Grove, and Public Policy Polling all found Obama up by three. Colorado stays a “Tossup”, though shaded bluer than last week. Intraders agree with me; the Colorado market has Obama at 51 percent, up a point from last week. Nate’s model is more bullish on the President, pegging him at 57 percent. I think reality lies somewhere between the two numbers, at 54.
- New Hampshire had four polls published this week. American Research Group and Rasmussen, both Republican-leaning, show Romney ahead by two points. UNH and Lake Research Partners have Obama up by nine and three points, respectively. UNH looks like an outlier, so I discount it somewhat. Accounting for house bias, ARG and Rasmussen end up at about the breakeven point. On balance, it’s just enough to push the Granite State one column to the left. New Hampshire now “Leans Obama”. On Intrade, Obama has the lead at 57 percent, down five from last week. Nate’s model has Obama at 69 percent. I’m not quite as bullish as Nate is, but I’d put New Hampshire at 60 for Obama.
- Iowa was polled twice this week. Rasmussen saw the race tied, while Public Policy Polling saw Obama up by two. Looking at this week alone would put Iowa in an Obama +1 position, but the bigger picture suggests this is a little too low. There’s not enough data in two polls to poll Iowa into “Tossup”, so Iowa remains “Leans Obama”, a position it has held during the entire time ballots have been able to be cast. That said, this is one to watch over the next several days. On Intrade, Obama has the lead here, with a 65 percent chance, up two from last week. Nate’s model is very optimistic for Obama, putting him at 68 percent. I think they’re both too optimistic; I have Iowa at 60.
- Ohio was polled nine times this past week. Nobody saw a Romney lead. Gravis, Angus Reid, Suffolk, and Rasmussen all saw the race tied. Public Policy Polling, Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA, Time/SRBI, and Lake Research Partners found Obama ahead by one, five, three, five, and two points, respectively. Accounting for house bias Ohio is a little bluer than last week, and is more comfortably in “Leans Obama” territory. Buckeyes have been able to vote for a month now. The Intrade market gives the edge to Obama, at 64 percent, up two from a week ago. Nate’s model says Obama has a 75 percent chance. Mine says 66, right on the border of “Likely Obama”.
- Nevada got polled four times this week. American Research Group, Rasmussen, NBC/Marist, and Public Policy Polling saw Obama ahead by two, two, three, and two points, respectively. Unlike last week, this week’s numbers all point in one direction. The Silver State moves to “Likely Obama”. Intraders are really bullish for the President this week; he is trading at 80 percent, up 11 points from a week ago. Nate is almost as bullish, at 79 percent. I’m not quite that sanguine, but I have Nevada at 70.
- Wisconsin got polled twice this week. Angus Reid and Public Policy Polling show Obama up by five and six points, respectively. Even accounting for house bias, this is still a comfortable lead for the President at this stage of the election cycle. Last time I said we needed to keep an eye out, because polls were somewhat suggestive of a tightening race. With the newest round of polls, the picture looks clearer. I’m moving Wisconsin to “Likely Obama”, given the lack of movement toward Romney and the short time remaining for Romney to pull off a victory here. Intraders remain confident in Obama here, trading him at 69 percent, up one from a week ago. Nate considers Wisconsin likely Obama, at 86 percent. I split the two, having Obama at 75.
- Pennsylvania was polled four times this week. Angus Reid, Gravis, Muhlenberg, and Rasmussen have Obama up by nine, three, five, and five points, respectively. With so little time remaining in the race, and Romney having trailed in all polls not conducted by Susquehanna for the entire year, the Republicans’ brief hope here has fully faded. Pennsylvania drops off the list after this installment. The markets at Intrade agree with this, putting the President at 79 percent, down four from a week ago. Nate’s model has Obama at 94 percent, which is only a hair more optimistic than my 90 percent.
- Michigan was polled twice this week. Angus Reid showed Obama up by nine, while FMW/Baydoun had Obama up by only a half point. Baydoun has consistently been several points to the right of the consensus, despite being contracted by the Democratic Party; there’s no reason to believe otherwise this time. Romney hasn’t led in a poll since August (Baydoun), and the recent consensus has had Obama ahead by a consistent five points. Like Pennsylvania, Michigan drops off the list after this installment. At Intrade, Obama is trading at 91 percent here, up six from last week. Nate’s model has Obama at 98 percent, slightly higher than my 95 percent.
Three states shifted one column to the left this week. North Carolina moved back from “Likely Romney” to “Leans Romney”, which makes sense when you consider that it has been on the cusp between the two, and the model is more sensitive this close to election day. New Hampshire moved from “Tossup” back to “Leans Obama”, giving the President four more electoral votes. Nevada moved one more column to the left. Based on the model, Obama has a probable 281 electoral votes, up four from last week. It’s been nearly four consecutive months in which Obama could lose all tossups and still stay in the White House.
Conclusion
The national polls still show the race effectively tied, while the state tallies continue to indicate a comfortable Obama lead. Historically, the state-by-state tallies have been more accurate than the national ones, which leads me to believe that Obama still has the edge.
What if I’m wrong, and the national numbers are right? If so, then we should shift the states about two points to the right. Romney would pick up Virginia, Colorado, New Hampshire, and Iowa, giving him 267 electoral votes. Romney would then need three more electoral votes. In this scenario, Ohio would still lean to Obama based on the polls, but would be Romney’s most likely pickup. While the systemic forces in Ohio aren’t as strong as they are in Florida, they could be enough to push Ohio to Romney if the national numbers are right. This scenario is less likely today than it was a week ago. Alternatively, Romney could pick up Nevada or Wisconsin, but those appear to be out of reach as well.
If I had to predict an Electoral College result based on the model, which puts more emphasis on the state polls, I’d shift things a hair from last week. Both tossups, which last week were in Romney’s column, would now be Obama’s. This would give Obama 303, and Romney 235.
How do you feel about these predictions? Do you differ on them? If so, how, where, and why?
Related articles
Reëlection Watch: October 20, 2012
NATE SILVER: Obama’s Odds Of Winning Are Now Back Over 70%
NATE SILVER: Intrade’s Wrong — Obama Has A 69% Chance Of Being Reëlected
Oct. 25: The State of the States
Obama’s Dropping On Intrade Again, But Nate Silver Says His Lead Is Increasing
NATE SILVER: Obama’s Odds Of Winning Have Now Surged Back To 74%

This entry was posted by Michael Weiss on October 27, 2012 at 3:00 am, and is filed under Reelection Watch. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0.You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.
-
#2 written by Max 6 months ago
-
#3 written by rgbact 6 months ago
Still going with a 1.5% win for Romney and a really narrow win in OH, and thats leaning on state polls. However, I strongly suspect state polls are overcooking Dem turnout due to a weak likely voter screen. If Dems are really able to count on +7 in turnout in a typical presidential election, the GOP may have to give up on the presidency. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if those 2008 registered voters don’t show up again (like in 2010) and we see a margin more like what Gallup shows.
-
#4 written by PNE 6 months ago
Michael: You live in a strange world. In the world that I live in (which is the real world), the idea of Florida being more likely to go to Romney than North Carolina would be considered (and is) ridiculous.
I’m still looking at a 50–49 Romney win in NC, FL being the coin flip state, and Obama winning all the other swing states. This leads to an EV total of either 303–235 or 332–206 depending on Florida. Either way, Obama wins, so I’m pretty optimistic.
-
I don’t generally make predictions, because I know it’s far too easy to see what I want to see. (Honestly how many left-leaning commentators are predicting a Romney victory? How many conservatives are saying the President will be reëlected?)
But I will give my view on early announcements. Most polls in the eastern time zone close at 8:00 PM. Of the eastern states that are even close to questionable, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Michigan are closest to Obama wins. (Some people still pretend that Pennsylvania is reachable for Romney — I don’t. That’s Obama’s.)
By 8:05, we should know whether the states I just listed went for Obama or Romney. Those states, plus the ones we know are safe (like California and Illinois and Minnesota, etc.) gives Obama 259 electoral votes — only 11 shy of the 270 he needs. The other states still available are Florida (29), North Carolina (15), Virginia (13), Wisconsin (10), Colorado (9), Iowa (6), and Nevada (6). Any of the first three puts him over (and they’re all east coast — the election could be decided when the eastern polls close). Any two of the last four is an Obama win (and most commentators say Colorado and Nevada are virtual certainties).
So, to my mind, the states to watch in the first announcements are NH, OH, and MI. If they all go for Obama, it’s pretty much all over.
Another way of putting it: out of the six uncertain states in the eastern timezone — NH, OH, MI, VA, NC, and FL — Obama needs any three (or FL and just one other, except for NH), and it’s virtually decided. If he wins any four of these, then he’s already over 270 when you add his other certain East Coast wins, and the lock states of IL, MN, NM, WA, OR, HI and CA.
On the other hand, if Obama doesn’t win at least three of the six up-for-grabs in the eastern timezone — especially if Romney wins Florida — then it could be a very long night.
This also means Romney needs to win at least four of the six Eastern tossups, and one of them must be Florida. Obama does not need to win Florida. Romney does.
That’s how I see the scorecard in the early evening.
-
#6 written by Mainer 6 months ago
Correct me if I’m wrong but generally at this point in a national election aren’t the candidates zeroing in on the swing states and doing some serious pressing of the flesh and local or at least state wide interviews. Maddow raised the point of Ryan camping out in areas that the Republicans already have and Mitt is stump speaking. It seems even more stilted than it has been. It also seems as though there are a lack of people sharing the stage with Mitt and those that are either in person or in shout outs are more of a detriment than a help to his campaign. Some one asked on the other thread why a gazillion dollars seem not at this point to have bought the election for Mitt. That is pretty easy..Mitt sucks as a politician and even as a human. Any one seen how little of his own fortune Mitt has invested in his own campaign? Mitt plays with other peoples money, always has always will. Now I doubt the president has spent much of his own cash either but then again he doesn’t have 250+ million stashed here there and every where but here.
-
#7 written by Mainer 6 months ago
DC that really matches some of the discussion at the coffee shop this AM and that was from a couple of our better connected Republicans. Some of the teaper types looked like they were sucking on lemons listening to it and they sure were working on pushing the every thing is beautiful line. Lots can happen in the closing days but the two lads doing the bulk of the talking this AM were offering up a pretty bleak view of Romney chances especially in the East where they really do know the system.
-
#8 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
Mainer, without taking a hack at Romney, you allude to a ‘social’ dynamic that I’ve noticed, as well. When you mix a population of conservative and progressive knowledgeable citizens/voters together in something like a coffee shop setting, the discussion often takes some odd turns. For my part, from a more liberal perspective, admittedly, when you force a conservative to listen to what he actually says without what I’d call supportive crowd dynamics, often the conversation ends up in a more neutral, compromising place. There is a clue in that fact to what’s wrong in our political discourse now. I’d have to admit, as well, SOME of the conservative comments pull liberals back to the reality of the situation(s) that they are far to idealistic about.
-
#9 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
-
A good examination from last week about what’s up with Gallup, and why they’ve become such huge outliers in the past few cycles.
(Cliff notes summary from the article: Gallup is wrestling with two really major problems in their polling… a messed-up “likely voter” screen, and a serious under-sampling of non-white voters.)
-
#11 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
-
#12 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
The Washington Post may have generated the ‘October Surprise’ with it’s poll on racial prejudice in the context of this years election that came out this morning. For instance, they estimate it’s costing Obama at least 5 points. Now the question, does our reflection in the mirror effect our honesty with ourselves. One thing for sure, Ann Coulter is going to go off on this. White GOPers are about 2X as racially impacted as white Democrats.
-
-
-
PNE,
In the world that I live in (which is the real world), the idea of Florida being more likely to go to Romney than North Carolina would be considered (and is) ridiculous.
In terms of the people voting, I agree. But there’s a difference between people casting votes and a final vote tally being reported. Florida has a larger gap in that regard.
-
#16 written by DrFunguy 6 months ago
DC,
I wouldn’t count on early results from Ohio. Expecting a long night as the vote is within the margins of chicanery in OH, VA and FL. Also, too, the Frankenstormaggedonacalyps!
-
-
-
#19 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
Michael,
over the years, from time to time, I’ve annotated comments I make at The Chronicle with links to Logarchism. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if their political writers are aware/read here from time to time. There are some quite sophisticated, detailed introductory posts made here.
-
#20 written by rgbact 6 months ago
For instance, they estimate it’s costing Obama at least 5 points.
I think you missed the part where they mention he also gains about 3 pts from pro-black prejudice (or is that ‘black pride’ when blacks vote against the white guy?). So net, its about 2 pts, maybe. Course, some people hate Mormons, and rich people. Many prejudices.
-
#21 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
-
#22 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
-
DrFunguy
I wouldn’t count on early results from Ohio. Expecting a long night as
the vote is within the margins of chicanery in OH, VA and FL.True. Fortunately, Obama can win without any of these states. He can even lose these three and North Carolina and still win. But in that scenario, we won’t find out for certain until after the polls close in Nevada.
-
cc,
I appreciate your help in marketing Logarchism to the rest of the world. We can always use the boost. And I also appreciate your kind words about the articles.I have a fairly big backlog of topics that will start appearing after the election. I think that’s true for the other regular authors here, too.
-
#26 written by Max 6 months ago
-
#27 written by Max 6 months ago
-
-
#30 written by parksie555 6 months ago
A lot of noise about Gallup from lefties lately. Said lefties appear to think Gallup’s likely voter screen is flawed and is not giving a correct estimation of the final popular vote totals. So I took a look at Gallup’s historical results.
In the last half century (since 1960) the average difference between the Republican final popular vote tally and the Gallup final estimate was –0.6. The corresponding difference for the Democrats is +0.8. In other words the average Gallup result overestimates the difference between R and D by about a percent and a half in favor of the Democrats.
The worst miss for Gallup in this period was in 1992, when they overestimated Clinton’s share by 5.7 points. However this seems to be a significant outlier related to a third party run by Ross Perot, whose share Gallup underestimated by 5.0 points.
The next worse miss was in 1980, when they underestimated the Gipper’s share by 3.8 points. There was also a significant third party run that year, from John Anderson. However in this case Gallup overestimated Anderson’s share, but only by 1.4 points. It appears that in this case Reagan’s late momentum after his successful debate performance (sound depressingly familiar, lefties?) appears to have been the biggest contributor to the error in Gallup’s estimate. I think the final Gallup poll in 1980 was about 5 days before the election.
So let’s toss these two points out of the averages. Probably not sound from a rigorous statistical perspective, but what the heck.
If we do so the average error is about –0.3/+0.3 — Gallup now overestimating Democrats by about half a percent.
Now take a look at the last three cycles. Call it the “cell phone era”. The errors look pretty random but the average is now –1.2/+0.1. Now up to a 1.3 % spread in favor of the Dems.
Now look at the trend of the last three cycles — R error: +0.1/-1.7/-2.0, D error –2.4/+0.7/+2.0.
You read that last point right — last cycle Gallup overestimated Obama’s share by 2 points and underestimated McCain’s by 2 points. And this in a cycle where one would have expected the significant increase in the youth and minority votes to cause Gallup to miss the other way.
Does this data tell you that Gallup is having a problem getting the right voter screen due to minority and youth voters? I sure don’t see it.
I think Gallup has probably made some corrections in their screen based on their 2008 miss and that is why they are appearing to be the outlier.
So if the current Gallup +5 for Romney holds up one would expect him to win the popular vote by about 5.5 percentage points based on the last half century of Gallup data. If we look at just the data since 2000 one would expect Romney to win by about 6 percentage points.
Either way it’s a clear win, both in the popular vote and the electoral college.
My prediction now is Romney takes all the Leans and Likely Romney states from the RCP Electoral College count, plus FL, VA, OH, WI, CO, and NC from the tossups for a 285–253 win.
-
parksie,
Something to consider: when one looks at the spectrum of polls available, it’s exceedingly rare for the ones on either end of the spectrum to be the correct ones. I, for one, don’t really care that much why Gallup has been so far to the right of the consensus for so much of this cycle. I merely observe that they have been, and therefore find it hard to believe that they’re right and everyone else is wrong.As I said before, we’ll know in a week and change. In the meantime, you and rgbact can hold onto that thread of hope.
-
#32 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
Fascinating new read on ‘538’ where Silver reveals a little about his regression modeling methods, probit fits. Figure 7 is particularly interesting in the following tutorial. (http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Courses/SPIDA/logit-models-notes.pdf)
-
#33 written by astrodude 6 months ago
-
#34 written by Max 6 months ago
-
#36 written by Max 6 months ago
parksie,
Good analysis, but meaningless. According to your analysis, you used Gallup’s final polls to compare with the final results. These aren’t the final polls.
Remember comparing Ras’s final polls with the results and getting close to the mark, when all along he was favoring the GOP?
But truly, a good exercise on your part. Big thumbs up.
-
#37 written by MoldyMe 6 months ago
-
astrodude,
Is Indiana really just “lean Romney”, as opposed to “likely Romney”, as seen on the EC map?
It’s likely “Likely Romney”. But Indiana is so sparsely polled that I have to use national inference if I want to nail it down better.
since the Mourdock flare-up there have been more polls.
Nope. Indiana’s an expensive state to poll, because they don’t allow robodialing. This is why it’s hard to tell how Mourdock has been doing, a particularly important thing to determine after Mourdock’s latest debate comments.
My gut says Indiana goes Romney and Donnelly.
-
#40 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
-
#42 written by channelclemente 6 months ago
Mono,
the cums are smooth and monotonic. I recognize it could be an extraneous effect, all I’m saying is something is out of the ordinary. This is how they caught the ’round off’ bank bandit years ago. You remember the guy who cracked the bank software, and was taking the penny round off error to his account.
-
DC,
Not smoking gun, but pretty compelling. It’s not a surprise to me, though. As I’ve mentioned before, this is a problem that long predates computers. We talk big about having the best of everything (don’t we, GROG?), but our election system is worse than that of many nations we typically consider despotic. And this isn’t a problem that can be solved by voter ID laws. -
-
In the end, the meme that we are a “center-right” nation (by which they really mean “way the hell crazy-ass far-right insane” nation) is false. This idea can only be maintained because election fraud is rampant in this country. We are a progressive nation, and when progressives are elected, it is because the overwhelming weight of Truth sometimes overcomes the forces of despair.
-
#46 written by rgbact 6 months ago
This idea can only be maintained because election fraud is rampant in this country.
Wait, I thought you said fraud is insignificant before? Are you now admitting that there are many ways to scam the system? Btw, have you caught the recent work by James OKeefe, which lost a Democrat’s son his campaign job?
In the end, the meme that we are a “center-right” nation is false.
I agree that the “center-right nation” is likely false. Course, your provide little evidence to support your “progressive nation” so I guess you’re trying to start your own meme.
-
#47 written by DrFunguy 6 months ago
-
An interesting interview on Meet the Press today with Governor Kasich of Ohio. Kasich expressed a great deal of confidence that Romney would carry Ohio. Now, granted, this could be nothing more than partisan cheerleading, but given the degree to which the Ohio government (like all states) has the power to falsify election results, and is able to get away with it as long as the election appeared close to begin with…it’s really irresponsible for him to make such a statement.
Moreover, it begs the bigger question that we should be asking: does he know more than he’s letting on? Is the Ohio election, just over a week away, fixed?
-
rgbact,
I thought you said fraud is insignificant before?
It’s really unfortunate how little attention you’ve paid to this subject over the past year. I’ve been the one mostly leading the charge at Logarchism regarding the voting process itself. Over that time, my message (and DC’s as well, if you had been paying attention) is as follows:
- The security of our voting system is a huge issue
– The most significant vulnerabilities in our current system revolve around the decentralized nature of the collecting, counting, and reporting functions, all of which have insufficient (and in many cases, no) checks on them
– The focus on in-person spoofing votes (i.e., voter impersonation) is a distraction, aimed at a low-value, high risk form of attack least likely to be used in a statistically significant wayThe referenced article demostrates exactly how and why this is the case.
-
#50 written by DrFunguy 6 months ago
Quote of the day:
“…despite the participation of tens of thousands of journalists spending tens of millions of dollars using a dizzying array of communications technology devoted to covering the campaign, the system ultimately fails to justify itself in its most essential purpose: to ensure accountability for citizens and their leaders and to offer the kind of information necessary to help voters make an educated choice for the future of their country…“Eric AltermanAmen
-
You must be logged in to post a comment. - Comment Feed for this Post
About Michael Weiss (325 posts)
Michael is a jack of many trades, and master of a few. His varied background includes government and private businesses, both large and small. His experience in the financial services and computer industries has led him to computer security.





The problem with a status analysis, however accurate, is that it of necessity fails to make allowances for trajectory. Romney’s trajectory is going to be rather steeply downward, partly because that’s just what happens to any candidate whose momentum begins to fade in the final weeks, and partly because of the unique elements in this particular election.
One of the major elements is the high-risk strategy the Romney campaign has decided to employ, which is to present their candidate as all things to all voters and hope people don’t notice (or will simply ignore) the inconsistencies in his positions. This has led him into a position, ten days out, where he is beset with peril on all sides and needs to hide from the public.
Romney can’t go on talk shows or Sunday shows where he might be asked to explain his economic plan. He can’t do press conferences, avails or gaggles where he might be asked about Richard Mourdock. He can’t even go on The View or Jay Leno, where he might be skewered by some pointed barbs for which he has no credible answer. In the crucial days pre-election, when Obama is everwhere, five events a day in four different states, talking to everybody from Douglas Brinkley to Jay Z, Romney has to remain the Invisible Man.
This means he has no means of improving his numbers, and at this point in an election campaign, what isn’t going up is coming down. Rapidly.
I think because of the rather bizarre circumstance I outlined above (we have never seen a major candidate with policy positions so wildly inconsisent that he is unable to face the electorate in the final days of a national campaign) this week will see a collapse in Romney’s numbers that will be near unprecedented in election history.
Therefore I am cautiously comfortable making my final prediction… I now see Michael’s 303 map and add Florida and North Carolina, for a total of 347 electoral votes for Obama.