Fill in the blank: I’ve seen more _________ yard signs in my NoVa neighborhood. (Springfield: credit, unemployment rate)

[MrsEvie64]

Originally Posted by Caladium

Just a thought... in the last few weeks Loudoun County was swamped by Romney signs. They were everywhere. There must have been at least 5-6 of them for every Obama sign. Yet, that didn't reflect how people voted--Obama won Loudoun County.

I just hope people remember this when the next election rolls around, and next time keep the signs to a minimum. One is enough, you don't need a whole forest of them trashing up our medians. Also, no matter who your candidate was I hope everyone will take down their signs now that the election is over.

I am in Prince William and the same thing here -- Romney bumper stickers and signs EVERYWHERE. I'm talking about at least 15 to 1 Romney in my neighborhood and the ones surrounding me, and that's just yard signs legally placed. The illegal ones in every median were even more numerous. Not to mention all the Obama signs that kept getting stolen.

I'm really surprised it wasn't closer out here. Obama won by a nice margin. I'll be interested in seeing the breakdown by precinct.

[CAVA1990]

Amendment Question 2 won a landslide victory with no signs.

[IndiaLimaDelta]

Originally Posted by Caladium

Just a thought... in the last few weeks Loudoun County was swamped by Romney signs. They were everywhere. There must have been at least 5-6 of them for every Obama sign. Yet, that didn't reflect how people voted--Obama won Loudoun County.

I just hope people remember this when the next election rolls around, and next time keep the signs to a minimum. One is enough, you don't need a whole forest of them trashing up our medians. Also, no matter who your candidate was I hope everyone will take down their signs now that the election is over.

Those in the industry know that signs and bumper stickers have almost no impact on elections. It's more for the morale of participants in a given campaign than it is for moving the needle.

There are those elections where a well-built ground game/"The Machine" beats enthusiasm and this was one such election. The shell-shocked comments of the Romney campaign folks ("they [new Democratic voters] keep coming out of nowhere") mirror the remarks made by Democrats when George W. Bush's campaign was able to turn out hietherto ignored right-leaning folks in exurbs ("We had the best Democratic turn out ever. It's just that the other team turned out even more! These folks kept coming out in droves like zombies rising from the dead in these exurbs").

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by IndiaLimaDelta

Those in the industry know that signs and bumper stickers have almost no impact on elections. It's more for the morale of participants in a given campaign than it is for moving the needle.

There are those elections where a well-built ground game/"The Machine" beats enthusiasm and this was one such election. The shell-shocked comments of the Romney campaign folks ("they [new Democratic voters] keep coming out of nowhere") mirror the remarks made by Democrats when George W. Bush's campaign was able to turn out hietherto ignored right-leaning folks in exurbs ("We had the best Democratic turn out ever. It's just that the other team turned out even more! These folks kept coming out in droves like zombies rising from the dead in these exurbs").

Apparently Nate and Intrade saw them coming.

[IndiaLimaDelta]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

Apparently Nate and Intrade saw them coming.

If I fired an arrow into the sky and a bird fell, I guess that means I hit it.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by IndiaLimaDelta

If I fired an arrow into the sky and a bird fell, I guess that means I hit it.

The results speak for themselves. I told you ahead of time what would happen and it did.

[IndiaLimaDelta]

Originally Posted by CAVA1990

The results speak for themselves. I told you ahead of time what would happen and it did.

Broken clocks and all that. You should know that arriving at the right conclusion for the wrong reasons can be much more dangerous than being wrong.

Note that I never said Romney would win, merely that single polls, being backward-looking snapshots, aren't very accurate at predictions (aggregations are better, to repeat).

1% or so change in VA, OH, FL and CO would have handed the victory to Romney (to be more precise 2.5% in CO and 0.3% in FL). It was a very close election, far out of whack with the Intrade predictions.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by IndiaLimaDelta

1% or so change in VA, OH, FL and CO would have handed the victory to Romney (to be more precise 2.5% in CO and 0.3% in FL). It was a very close election, far out of whack with the Intrade predictions.

You seem to be mistaking odds with predicted vote counts or something. Intrade predicted the election would be very close right up to election day. Much of the week before it had Obama at 281, Romney at 235 and 22 tossups, those being CO and VA. Ohio was considered leaning Obama. The only state that turned out other than predicted at that point was Florida, which the Intraders had as leaning Romney. I predicted 290-248 which is what I posted on the political forum the week before as I thought VA would go to Romney and CO to Obama.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by IndiaLimaDelta

Broken clocks and all that. You should know that arriving at the right conclusion for the wrong reasons can be much more dangerous than being wrong.

Note that I never said Romney would win, merely that single polls, being backward-looking snapshots, aren't very accurate at predictions (aggregations are better, to repeat).

1% or so change in VA, OH, FL and CO would have handed the victory to Romney (to be more precise 2.5% in CO and 0.3% in FL). It was a very close election, far out of whack with the Intrade predictions.

The state polls that Silver (and other poll aggregators) relied on indicated BOTH that Obama was ahead in the swing states AND that it was close in the swing states. 5 polls showing a 2% Obama lead confirm a 2% Obama lead, they do not suggest a 10% Obama lead. The polls turn and Silver et al turned out to be right about likely turn out, and right about the party ID (per the exit polls).

as for being backward looking the track record over several elections, IIUC, is that the last polls before the election ARE pretty good for forecasting.

[CAVA1990]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

The state polls that Silver (and other poll aggregators) relied on indicated BOTH that Obama was ahead in the swing states AND that it was close in the swing states. 5 polls showing a 2% Obama lead confirm a 2% Obama lead, they do not suggest a 10% Obama lead. The polls turn and Silver et al turned out to be right about likely turn out, and right about the party ID (per the exit polls).

as for being backward looking the track record over several elections, IIUC, is that the last polls before the election ARE pretty good for forecasting.

Other than FL it didn't seem like there were any real surprises.