I thought I would Introduce Dr. Sam Wang of Princeton Consortium's dissection of bounces in general and where things stand as of today. It is a good read for anyone interested in understanding the schemes of Polling. In the 2008 Presidential Election Dr. Wang was off by 1 electoral vote. See Here. http://election.princeton.edu/...
He bested Kos's favorite Nate Silver who got 50 out 51 states correct but was off by 18.5 EV's. He outperformed Electoral Vote.com as well.
Dr. Wang explains in Anatomy of a bounce:
In the wake of his improved debate performance, President Obama’s recovery is now apparent. It is most clear when viewed in terms of the Meta-Analysis of state polls. Over the last four days, the Popular Vote Meta-Margin – the amount of swing it would take to create an electoral near-tie – has moved by over 1.0%. Today, the President’s effective lead, using Electoral College mechanisms, is Obama +1.8%. A rapid move like this can continue for a few days as polls catch up with the nation’s mental state.
But why do national polls continue to look so close, and in about half of cases good for Mitt Romney? To answer that, let’s take a look back at the effects of all three debates so far.
Dr. Wang goes on to explain things with graphs that are well over my head but he breaks it all down in laymen terms. Graphs can be viewed here.
http://election.princeton.edu/...
As per Gallup Polling, Dr Wang sees this as an UNATTRACTIVE trait in MEDIA Coverage.
Because the race is so close, individual polls will inevitably be all over the place. And news organizations love the outlier data points, like the Gallup poll showing Romney +6%. I find this to be a particularly unattractive trait in media coverage. It was what led me to start the poll meta-analysis in 2004.
Dr. Wang further delves into the debates and how each impacted both candidates.
The post-debate-1 correction was a nearly five-point swing. It was complete within one day. This means that the post-debate-day media meltdown could not have caused the swing – though it certainly helped cement perceptions.
What caused this crash? Considering the polarization of voters this year (only a small fraction are persuadable), it seems likely to be caused by a change in morale on both sides: hope among Romney’s supporters and despair among Obama supporters, and a consequent change in whether they meet the criteria for being a “likely voter.” Imagine that an Obama supporter was 60% likely to vote before Debate #1, and then 57% afterward – and vice versa for a Romney supporter. That could fully account for the change.
There could also be some fraction of voters whose minds were changed by suddenly-moderate-Mitt and stumbling-Barack.
Since that time, there’s been a reversal in the direction of change. On October 5, Romney had a narrow lead, about 1.0%. Today, President Obama is back in a razor-thin lead at the national level – about 0.5-1.0%.
But here is something interesting. National polls do not match the state polls – and it is state races that determine the outcome, via the Electoral College. In the Meta-Analysis that Andrew Ferguson and I report on this website, Obama has been ahead all along.
Daily Polls keep folks on edge when they really shouldn't. It doesn't mean that GOTV efforts should stop either. Because this race is viewed by the media as close EVERYONE should be more propelled and energized to see that President Barack Obama is re-elected for a second term. < By Me. :)