PRUDEN: All the signs say it’s Romney

The Washington Times ^ | November 2, 2012 | By Wesley Pruden

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Four days out, it looks like Mitt Romney.

October has come and gone with no surprise, with just a slow, plodding accumulation of signs and portents suggesting that “the One” who has come will soon be gone.

The polls are tight, and the numbers are steady, but it begins to feel like 1980 again, when a tight race between President Carter and Ronald Reagan broke open over the last weekend. His own pollsters went to Mr. Jimmy and Miss Rosalynn on Monday morning to tell them that “the numbers just aren’t there.”

If President Obama has taken such a meeting, there’s no hint of it. Both the Obama and Romney camps naturally predict victory, but the president’s men are a little more emphatic than their numbers warrant, which suggests they may be working hard to keep hope alive.

[muffaletaman]

Silver’s probably doing what the big banks did with the mortgage-backed derivatives... selling them to their customers but shorting them in their own trading accounts.

Hold your right hand high in the air. Wave it and yell loudly “Look here! 80%!”

And under the table with your left hand you quietly bet on the 20% outcome...

[USS Alaska]

I vote and I poll watch in W PA. I go into one of the most corrupt precincts in the area and watch the RATS piss and moan because poll watchers make cheating much harder.

[stremba]

You know, I’m so sick of hearing about Nate Silver. The only reason he carries any weight is that he predicted all but one state correctly in 2008. I heard nothing at all about him prior to that.

The real truth is that Nate Silver is nothing more than a manifestation of what statisticians call the lottery principal. Basically, that principal states that if you do something enough, events of low probability will occur simply by chance. In this case, Nate Silver was certainly NOT the only person trying to make predictions about the 2008 election. There were probably hundreds of bloggers out there trying to predict the state-by-state results.

So what are the odds of correctly predicting all but one state by chance alone? First of all, realize that there typically are only a handful of states where there’s an actual prediction to be made. Most results are pretty clear. For the sake of argument assume that there were 8 states where the results were uncertain and that these were true tossups. Given those assumptions, the probability of flipping a coin and predicting at least 7 of them right is about 0.4%. Pretty unlikely, but here’s where the lottery principal comes in. If you had 20 people trying to flip coins to predict the election, the probability of SOMEBODY doing as well as Silver is 35.6%. Obviously, the more people you had doing the predicting, the better the odds that SOMEONE would get it right or nearly so. The fact is that Silver was just this lucky someone last time around. If he does equally well this year, I would give him more credence, but predicting a single election well means nothing.

BTW, it’s much the same for mutual fund managers and stock brokers. There are lots of people trying to predict the stock market; by chance SOMEONE in a given period of time is going to look pretty good. That does not mean you should trust them to invest your money for you, especially if their advice doesn’t pass the “smell test” which is how I would describe Silver’s prediction this time around.

[loveliberty2]

The question before us is the same as the one in 1776:

Do we begin to assert our independence, or do we submit to slavery to big government?

Further, our actions going forward must be to do what America's citizens did after declaring their independence: they insisted that their elected leaders submit themselves to a written Constitution's limits and bounds.

"The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv'd them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas'd them for us with toil and danger and expence of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men. Of the latter we are in most danger at present: Let us therefore be aware of it. Let us contemplate our forefathers and posterity; and resolve to maintain the rights bequeath'd to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. - Instead of sitting down satisfied with the efforts we have already made, which is the wish of our enemies, the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that 'if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." Samuel Adams - Essay in the Boston Gazette, October 14, 1771

"When designs are form'd to raze the very foundation of a free government, those few who are to erect their grandeur and fortunes upon the general ruin, will employ every art to sooth the devoted people into a state of indolence, inattention and security, which is forever the fore-runner of slavery." Samuel Adams - Article signed "Candidus," in Boston Gazette, December 9, 1771

"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them." Samuel Adams - As Candidus in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772