Free Republic

You would think so. But those are not pared trades. Having the shorting option makes for more efficient markets.
But it does make you think, for sure.
Not enough, mind you, to change my assumptions about Tuesday. I still think Romney pulls off a convincing win.
Euro-leftist delusion is the best explanation IMHO for intrade odds.

Does anyone know if it is allowed to “short” on intrade?

I suspect they don’t. If they did, if someone is pumping up 0bama’s odds as is strongly suspected, if shorting were allowed, smart money would take that side of the trade. That and also how delusional the Europeans are with their leftist bias.

Great analysis. I posted earlier that if we get, on average, 4.5% changeover in the vote state by state, Romney wins. Your analysis is more in-depth and I believe you're right on the money as far as OH. There's no way OH stubbornly stays with 0bama, as if 2010 didn't happen.

OK,

Here are the numbers to illustrate what I tried to convey in the main post. I never cared about the total national vote (despite your insinuation) or the margins in lib states of CA, NY or IL. Having said that, we are one nation and we are going to see a seismic wave of crossover from D to R which will span nationwide and my exercise was simply to model at what percentage Romney wins enough crossover states to win the EC.

This lists the important potential ‘turnover’ states Romney will have to win to get to 270. Next to the state is the margin of McCain’s loss from 2008. The next number is the projected margin for Romney, assuming a 5% changeover in the vote for each state for 2012. Finally, last number is the cumulative EV added to McCain’s 181 (179+1ME+1NE).

State, 2008 loss margin, 2012 R win margin(5% changeover), EV Tally.
NC, -0.4, 9.6, 196
IN, -0.9, 9.1, 207
FL, -2.5, 7.5, 236
OH, -4.0, 6.0, 254
VA, -6.3, 3.7, 267
CO, -8.6, 1.4, 276

Note that CO will tilt with at least 4.5 changeover from 2008. Hence my reference to 4.5% as the Maginot line. You didn’t appreciate the Maginot line metaphor, that’s fine. I see it differently.

This whole argument started with your questioning my motives for posting simple math comparing 2008 actual results to what we need for it to end up different in 2012. Winning NC by 10% will be no big deal as it was almost a tie in 2008 and it doen’t take much to imagine a 5% changeover in NC. Even McCain won OK (for example) by 30+% so nothing surprizing if NC ends up with 10% difference in Romney’s favor. The point was that you can make an argument that such a result from NC may hint at a sizable shift in electorate’s preference from 2008 if extrapolated to other states. Which I think is a reasonable argument given it is one country after all and the economy, Benghazi, 0bamacare or whatever else that drives people’s feelings/decisions for the vote crosses state lines.

Now that we have argued this much, I hope to be able to be in good enough mood Tuesday night or Wed to use the actual percentages from each state (at least the important ones listed above) to see how consistent the changeover was and whether my model made sense. Which brings it to Ohio. I simply refuse to believe the rest of the nation will experience a certain % changover in voting yet OH will stubbornly stay with 0bama (which is what the libs are insisting). Not gonna happen. It only needs a 2%+ changeover from 2008 which is easy to imagine is already there. I predict at least a 5% win for Romney in OH.

As for bear/bare, I use a tablet which liberally switches between various options as I type. I am surprized you’d even find it worthwhile to spell it out. Your negative attack is one of the reasons I never bothered to post or even register. I have been following FR since at least 99-2000, more so prior to elections. Life is busy enough...

Traveling today. Will answer about the numbers tomorrow with details. It’s clear you didn’t get the point. I never cared about the national vote or the millions of votes in CA in 0bama’s favor.

But “lump”? Come on. Stay classy. Surely if you know of the Maginot line you must know what “lumpen” means and why crusading against them is in the conservative cause.
I actually work on curing “lumps” gone cancerous. Not nice at all.
Stay classy...

Now, that’s an intelligent argument (unlike kabar’s). I’m in agreement that all we may need is the enthusiasm gap to account for the changeover. But still, evefytime I hear someone who voted for zero in 2008 having change of heart this year I feel better. 6 days to go!

So what. There’s a first time for everyone. My post clearly states assumptions I used. Are you challenging the margin of McCain’s loss or are unable to understand 2nd grade math so resort to ad hominem attack? If anything, the message was how many do we need to cross over. I have convinced at least two of my libertarian friends to vote for Romney even though they have reservations. What have you done for the cause?
Karl Rove’s piece in WSJ today predicts a 5.1 % changeover. Put that in your pipe and smoke it! Right in line with what i said we would need on average across the board.
Now tell me what in my model do you question. Put up or STFU.

What in my post do you see that would suggest stirring the pot?
I shared some election math scenarios. For Romney to win votes have to change over. The question is how many.
Paranoid, aren’t we? Scared of newbies?

There must be thousands who quietly read without bothering to join because of comments like yours.

The 7% scenario above will be a landslide in my book.
Sorry but can’t relax until the fat lady sings.