Overconfidence: A Sermon on Not Picking Your Cherries Until They Hatch
Like every other breathless cosmopolitan whose veins pulse with red-white-and-blue blood (the world being at stake and all), I start the day at the keyboard, trying to put a floor under my worry, hunting excitement, relief, or both, with Pollster.com and fivethirtyeight.com (just for openers), scrutinizing the state totals, then totaling them again on the assumption that each Obama figure has to be discounted by 5 points. I rummage through reports on Obama lawn signs sprouting on hitherto arid pastures and that some slow-to-decide white workers have decided that, in the words of a steelworker in old industrial Beaver Falls, PA, "It's Time to Give the Black Guy a Chance."
I'm old-fashioned about evidence: I like it. I like anecdotes too. We go canvassing in PA and extrapolate from a few conversations that we've moved a handful of voters a notch. I take pleasure that the Obama campaign is better-organized than the 2004 Kerry campaign. I try to keep tabs on Republican vote-suppression schemes and weigh, as best I can, the evidence that they're set up to steal the kaboodle. (I don't see the evidence, but cheer the lawyers who will fan out in the coming weeks.) I scavenge for evidence that Republicans (Christopher Buckley) and Iraq-war belligerents (Christopher Hitchens) have concluded that restarting the Cold War is a bad idea, or at least low-priority. Also for evidence that the Bradley effect might be outweighed by a reverse Bradley effect; or that, if the Bradley effect ever existed, it dissolved years ago; or, on the other hand, that the first two clauses in this sentence are wishful, delusional, premature. (For example, here's a pretty convincing piece by the former pollster for George Deukmejian, the guy who defeated Tom Bradley in California's 1982 gubernatorial race, saying that the Bradley effect didn't even hurt Bradley). There are calmer days, less calm days, and no desperate days for four weeks now, and counting. We are all poll-hogs now.
But really, people: the world, as a certain sage once put it, is not only full of known unknowns, it's full of unknown unknowns. One of the known unknowns is turnout. The unknown unknowns include--well, something.
A friend (who lives in a small town!) writes:
Whether there is or is not a "Bradley effect," it is very helpful to believe there is one, and very dangerous to believe there is not. And since we don't know for sure, the only prudent thing to do is to assume that there is one. Any other assumption is reckless. Whether it is due to a "Bradley effect," an October surprise, or some other variant, the good guys always need 60% to eke out a 1% victory. If Dems get overconfident, then McCain will have us just where he wants us. Instead of measuring the drapes, we need to be fighting to stave off defeat.
My friend is preternaturally gloomy. He is also sagacious. He's been right before. The kind of morale that picks only the plumpest cherries is thin morale, which is to say, no morale at all. We have fabulous chances, and there are no sure things. Leave the slam dunks to George Tenet.
The moral is obvious: Don't gloat, don't grump--organize.
Todd, you wrote: "I try to keep tabs on Republican vote-suppression schemes and weigh, as best I can, the evidence that they're set up to steal the kaboodle. (I don't see the evidence, but cheer the lawyers who will fan out in the coming weeks.)"
Do you believe electronic voting systems are generally secure in our country? I'm reading your colleague Mark Crispin Miller's edited volume Loser Take All, after having also read the Steve Freeman and Joel Bleifuss book, Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen? a few years ago, and I have to say I have zero confidence in the security and integrity of the vote in our country.
The implications of believing this cut in the same direction as your counsel--figure our side needs 60% to win by 1%. Same conclusion. All out past the finishing tape.
I am wondering, though, if there are election integrity activists who are denizens here and who have specific guidance on what ordinary citizens might look for, or do, in the remaining time this election cycle to minimize the chances of another stolen election?
I sure hope that if we get Obama and a solid Dem majority in both houses of Congress that Congress will take aggressive steps to fix the vulnerabilities in the current non-system (which go well beyond vulnerabilities of the technology to hacking, of course), which are massive, and restore justified confidence in the integrity of our elections.
October 14, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your patience and sorry for the inconvenience!
Best regards, Alex, CEO of youtube downloader
December 22, 2010 6:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watch the documentary "Uncounted" and you'll be even more anxious. This is a superb analysis of the 2000, 2004, and 2006 elections with convincing evidence in all 3 instances that vote tampering and voter suppression techniques aided Republicans over Democrats. Here is a pearl from that film to ponder: Exit polling has reached a level of sophistication and sufficient reliability that it will predict the outcome of the actual election to confidence level of at least 96%.(ie., less than 4% deviation) In 2006 there were 13 states where the election outcomes deviated from the predicted outcome by over 4%. In each case the deviation favored the Republican candidate. Sort of like flipping a coin 13 times and having it come up heads each time. The scariest thing about this documentary is how easy it is to corrupt electronic voting machines.
October 14, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just outside Philadelphia, there sits the largest apartment complex in Republican controlled Bucks County. This complex is populated by the elderly, some immigrants from India and Pakistan and a few other minorities. The complex is heavy with Democrat voters.
We have 3 county commissioners, two majority R, one minority D. For the longest time our one Dem commissioner was a 'go along to get along' but she was dumped in the last election and now we have a woman tiger, still in the minority, but a tiger.
A couple of months ago the County suddenly moved the polling place from the Community center in the Apt complex to a hall a mile away, and across the high traffic main highway through the town.
Since most in the complex didn't drive and public transportation is sparce, voting became a difficulty.
The story of the move was that the County Commissioners received two letters from citizens expressing fear of voting inside the complex due to an alleged crime problem. This became the reason for the move.
It was eventually discovered that of the two letter writers, one was a Republican Committeeman the other a Republican activist.
A lawsuit was filed in Federal Court to move the machines back. In testimony by the chief elections official, a woman who controlled where the machines were located, it was learned, through tearful testimony by the woman, that she was pressured for an extended period by the County operating officer and the two Republican commissioners to move the machines, though she was reluctant to do so, as she had no solid reason for the move. She added that she lived in fear of this county operating officer who seemed to be the main force using pressure.
About a week ago they moved the machines to a shopping center next to the apartment complex, but still not in thier original location, in the community center inside the complex.
Voter suppression, Karl Rove would be proud.
October 14, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain had his cherry picked months ago by the wingnuts on the far right to secure the nomination.
Now with the violent vitriol spouted by his followers shaping the MSM "narrative," his chickens have come home to roost. Once the RNC defunds his flagging efforts, the doddering relic loses what limited ability he has to tell a new story.
Only a violent attack on the nation helps McCain now, and, given his erratic behavior of late, that's not even certain. Good luck with the tax and spend crap. People actually appear to understand Obama proposes cutting taxes for the many at the expense of the very few.
October 14, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
You say that you start the day, "scrutinizing the state totals, then totaling them again on the assumption that each Obama figure has to be discounted by 5 points."
I keep hearing this one, and then people also say, "Under these conditions, Obama should be beating McCain by 20 points", or whatever.
So my thinking is, you take off 5 points for the Bradley effect or some other negative, and then you add 5 back on for the fact that he's already being penalized for being black, and I think the numbers are pretty solid.
So buck up! And as you say, "organize"!
October 14, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ion wrote "Only a violent attack on the nation helps McCain now”
That’s exactly what McCain is doing; he's attacking those who don't see his vision for America.
He keeps attacking and bad mouthing Obama, because of Bill Ayers.
Bill Ayers is only a representation of what McCain hates about America.
He hates anti war demonstrations, anybody against the war is his enemy.
Think about this though.
John McCain could forgive his North Vietnamese captors and tormentors, but he can't forgive another American who happened to think, the McCain’s of the world were destroying America.
John McCain is a hypocrite, he can forgive a nation, who killed many of our brave soldiers, but he can’t let go of his hatred for Ayers.
John lacks compassion or the ability to forgive.
A question to John McCain: Did North Vietnam tell you they were sorry for fighting America?
October 14, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Resistance,
excellent post.
October 15, 2008 7:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
"scrutinizing the state totals, then totaling them again on the assumption that each Obama figure has to be discounted by 5 points."
I simply don't believe this is true. There is no evidence to support the idea that the Bradley effect is still there.
And, moreover, by lending credence to the myth that it is still there, we merely give Republicans a reason not to give up on this election. It hurts McCain when Brooks and Krauthammer and the rest jump off the Straight Talk bandwagon, and you know as well as I, there's only one reason they do it: they think he's going to lose anyway and this is their big chance to show they're not just Republican hacks.
So inventing new reasons to believe that McCain has a chance here is not just intellectually dishonest, it's also counterproductive politically.
Sorry to have to be a party pooper here.
October 15, 2008 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
It seems to me that Obama will win the election pretty much for sure if it is even close to being an honest election not determined by fraud or profound manipulation. Two of the leading possibilities interfering with this outcome are:
(1) Election stealing (as in 2000, and cogently argued for Ohio in 2004, w/the MSM AND ITS LEADING CRITICS blacking it out or supinely justifying it)
AND/OR (note that BOTH are mutually compatible)
(2) The W Bush Administration concocting some kind of MAJOR "security-and/or-terrorism" crisis in the less than three weeks remaining in the election.
------------------------------------
But just for good feelings, peeps might want to check out a new website of RWers called "postponetheelection.com". These folk are for real -- they are mobilizing to use the pretext of ACORN et al to bring a case to the Bush v Gore court system to put off election day, presumably until all the registrations can be FULLY vetted. Admittedly a long shot -- but certainly at least worth a laugh or two.
-------------------------------------
As for the second of my two relatively plausible non-mutually-exclusive scenarios, I sponsored a poll on Democratic Underground (DU) on this very issue. So far it has gotten 90 votes (I am seeking a minimum of an even 100) participating. OVER 52% think it at least LIKELY (more than 50%) that there WILL be such a crisis manufactured by the W Administration in this short time, while 31% give it little (0-10%) chance, probably considered the only sane position on TPM Cafe. My own view is somewhere in between the two (17% or so), but closer to 50% than to 10%. NOTE THAT MANUFACTURE OF A "SECURITY"-type crisis is by NO means a guarantee of defeating Obama -- far from it!
The poll is at:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7415972
On the other hand, another DUer has tried to put together the most plausible possible scenario for the election being stolen. It is at least plausible (vaguely) especially in combination with other factors, including but not limited to the "security" crisis option discussed above.
That item is at the following URL:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7456278
"If McCain wins (steals) the election, here's how it will happen". Here's a copy of the text of the latter:
[blockquote]
Edited on Wed Oct-15-08 04:38 AM by FlyingSquirrel
I've been over and over this. There's only one path to victory for McCain now IMO.
He's lost Florida. He's given up on Michigan. New Mexico has been in Obama's column too long to be plausibly stolen. He has no chance in PA.
Washington State is a very unlikely gamble even considering the Governor's race rematch (Dino Rossi - R vs. Chris Gregoire - D, in which Gregoire prevailed by 133 votes after three recounts in 2004). McCain has never led and the vote is too difficult to steal there.
That leaves only one possible way for McCain to win. I don't think he'll pull it off, but I'm posting this to warn people in those states to be especially cautious and vigilant and active.
------------
McCain starts off with his base.
MT, LA, AZ, AR, ND, MS, SD, GA, TX, KY, SC, AK, AL, KS, TN, NE, OK, WY, ID, UT = 158 EV
McCain wins states that are currently close that have been been red the past 2 elections:
MO, WV, IN, NC, NV, VA = 60 EV
----------------
McCain re-steals OH and barely wins NH = 24 EV
----------------
McCain now has 242 EV and needs 28 EV.
----------------
McCain pours money and time into MN and WI, makes "amazing comebacks" = 20 EV.
McCain steals CO (MSM proclaims "Bradley effect") = 9 EV.
----------------
Like I said, I don't think it's likely. But this, to me, is his only path to 'victory'.
So the states in which we need to be especially cautious, vigilant and active are:
OH, NH, MN, WI and CO.
----------------
And an upset in any of the following states will probably seal Obama's win:
MO, WV, IN, NC, NV, VA
----------------
NGU.
[/blockquote]
October 15, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was noted on Kos today that AP is reporting that the RNC is pulling presidential ads in Wisconsin, as well as Maine, to focus on troublesome red states.
October 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Madison believed that we should have separation of church and state throughout the land, federal and local. There was a fascinating moment during the congressional debate over what became the First Amendment. How could the beloved First Amendment be harmful to religion? Huntington feared that it would overturn or interfere with Connecticut’s approach, which was to have state-supported religion.
Chat | Chat
March 4, 2011 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
This informayion is very useful! Thanks!
Best regards, Katya, CEO of hyper v network configuration, iscsi initiator multipath
April 4, 2011 7:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability system
April 29, 2011 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink