Skip to main content

View Diary: Beyond the Margin of Error: When Polls Fail, or Why Elizabeth Warren Will Dash GOP Hopes (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  not sure what you're asking? n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Male, currently staying in Osaka-01. Voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

    by sapelcovits on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 03:57:13 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Obama won by about 7% nationally (0+ / 0-)

      in 2008. He lost narrowly in MO. Therefore, the difference between his margin of defeat in MO and his margin of victory nationwide was 7%. You're saying that McCain got 3% more in MO than he did nationwide.

      Wait, I think I figured it out. 3% more for McCain and 4% less for Obama would amount to 7% off the margin. So I think I answered my own question. According to Wikipedia: United States presidential election, 2008, Obama got 52.9% and McCain got 45.7% nationally. If we add 3 to McCain's total, it would be 48.7%, and if we subtract 4 from Obama's total, we get 48.9%.

      But, from further down in the cited article, actual election results in MO were 49.29% for Obama and 49.43% for McCain, so McCain got almost 4% more than his average percentage nationally, and Obama got less than 4% less.

      My guess is that the R+3 rating was, as usual, a composite of the last two presidential elections. That's what Cook always does to get their PVIs, isn't it?

      Formerly Pan on Swing State Project

      by MichaelNY on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 04:23:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Ok, yes (0+ / 0-)

        now I think we're on the same page. (btw, Cook goes off the two-party vote, I believe.)

        Male, currently staying in Osaka-01. Voting in RI-01, went to college in IL-01.

        by sapelcovits on Tue Jun 19, 2012 at 05:07:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site