Archive for the ‘2012 Campaign’ Category

How “intensity” turns a tie into a 6 point lead … here’s the math.

November 1, 2012

The election polls results are all over the place.

My take: the election is a dead heat nationally (slight Romney edge in the popular vote) and in key swing states (slight Obama lead in pivotal swing states, lead in electoral votes).

But … the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.

To get a better understanding of the dynamics in play, I dug into this week’s NPR poll.

Why NPR?

Because, if anything, it leans left, so no cookin’ the books for Mitt.

Also, it reported some interesting metrics that provide a basis for some interesting analysis.

  • Note: my primary intent is provide a calibrated analytical structure, not a prediction.

= = = = =
Topline Results

First, NPR reports Romney leading Obama by 1 point … 48% to 47% for all respondents … dead heat.

And, 48% + 47% = 95%, so 5% are still undecided, voting for another candidate, or hopelessly confused … or all three.

So, 5 points are arguably up for grabs.

Conventional wisdom says they break mostly for the challenger … advantage Romney.

image

Looking deeper – into the footnotes, NPR says:

  • ALL results are based on 1000 weighted cases, MoE = ±3.10

In other words, Romney’s score could be as high as 51% or as low 45%.

Obama’s score could be as high as 50% and as low as 44%.

Bottom line: Either candidate might be leading … Romney could be leading by as  many as 7 points … 51% to 44%.

Or, Obama could be leading by as many as 5 points … 50% to 45%.

That doesn’t tell us much, right?

= = = = =
Independent Voters

Let’s look at the Independent voters (above chart).

Romney leads with independent voters by 12 points … 51% to 39%,

Is that lead statistically significant?

Well, NPR says:

  • IND results are based on 309 respondents, MoE = ±5.58 percent.

So, Romney could be as high as 56.5% or as low as 45.5%.

Obama could be as high as 44.5% or as low as 33.5%.

Bottom line: Romney has an unequivocal, statistically significant lead among Independents.

= = = = =
Voter Intensity

Here’s where things get interesting …

NPR asked:

  • On a scale of one to ten, with one being “not at all enthusiastic” and ten being “extremely enthusiastic,”
    how enthusiastic are you about voting in the Presidential election this November?

image

In marketing research, there’s a principle called the “top box effect”.

In essence, it says to focus on folks who check the highest level allowed … and pretty much ignore the rest as insignificant.

So, what do the numbers tell us?

Republican “intensity”, i.e. “extremely enthusiastic”, is 76% – 10 percentage points higher than the Dems 66% … and 22% higher than Independents 54%.

That’s a big intensity advantage for the Republicans.

How might it translate to votes?

We need another piece of data and some basic arithmetic.

= = = = =
Turnout Assumption

You’ve probably been hearing the grumbling—mostly from Republicans – that recent surveys have been skewed Democratic … that they implicitly assume that Dems will turnout more than Republicans.

  • Of course, the turnout is a function of both party registration (“mix”) and voting propensity.  Most surveys of party affiliation peg the Dems & Republicans at about even.

The NPR “mix” is 35% Republicans, 33% Independents, and 31% Republicans.
image

We’ll test the sensitivity of those numbers later … for now, let’’s use NPR’s assumption.

= = = = =
”Hard Support”

OK, now let’s play with the numbers.

Here’s the summary chart … below, I’ll explain it.

image

What we’re trying to get to is “Hard Support” … folks who are “intense” (“extremely enthusiastic”) and favor Romney or Obama.

To get at that, we have to look at Republicans, Independents and Democrats separately.

For example, 76% of Republicans are “extremely enthusiastic” … and 96% of Republicans say they’ll vote for Romney.

Multiply those 2 numbers together, and they imply that 73% of Republicans are both “extremely enthusiastic” and inclined to vote for Romney (76% X 96% = 73%).

Since the sample “mix” is 31% Republican, Romney’s hard support from Republicans is equivalent to 22.6% of all voters (since 73% X 31% = 22.6%).

Applying the same calculations to the other classifications (Independent & Democrat) … and the data indicates that of Romney’s total of 48%,  32.9% is “hard support” and 15.2% is “soft support” that is less likely to show up at the polls.

Repeating the process for Obama, the data indicates that of Obama’s total of 47%. 29.1%% is “hard support” and 17.9% is “soft support”.

So what?

Romney has a 3.7 percentage advantage in hard support – the folks who are most likely to show up at the polls.

That’s a statistically significant number, given the polls 3 point margin of error.

Bottom line: If we factor in intensity, Romney has statistically significant advantage.

= = = = =
Another mix scenario

Let’s add one more twist.

What if the mix of Dems and Republicans is roughly equal at 33% … instead of 35% to 31%?

image

Big change!

Romney’s lead increases to 5.6% percentage points … Romney 50.6% to Obama 45%.

And, Romney’s hard support lead increases to 6.4 percentage points … well outside the margin of error.

= = = = =

Punch line

Yes, the headline number may signal a dead heat … within the margin of error.

But, if you factor in intensity and party mix … the numbers change pretty dramatically.

The Republican’s intensity advantage and lead among Independents seem pretty consistent across polls.

So, the key for Republicans is delivering on the intensity advantage … making sure that the “extremely enthusiastic” Republican & Independent voters turnout to vote.

For Dems, the turnout effort is even more critical since they have to close the intensity gap.

Dems claim that their turnout machine gives it substantial competitive advantage that will close the gap … or more.

I guess we’ll see next Tuesday.

>> Latest Posts

Update: Which pollster was most accurate in 2008 ?

October 31, 2012

A sharp-eyed Homa Files reader commented that the rankings we posted yesterday were preliminary … and that the Fordham prof. officially published a final listing that has substantially different ranking.

Here’s what we reported yesterday:

According to a published recap by a poli-sci prof at Fordham University, the pre-election projections from 2 polling organizations — Rasmussen and Pew —were right on the money in 2008.

Note that Gallup was near the bottom of the list … joined by the big media organizations – CBS, Reuters, ABC, NBC, WSJ, and Newsweek – which finished dead last.

The finals report still has Gallup, CBS, NY Times, and Reuters (C-SPAN) at the bottom of the heap.

Rasmussen and Pew – the preliminary winners – drop to the middle in the final report.

At the top: McClatchy, CNN and Fox … with Democracy Corps copping the top prize.

image

Thanks to D. Vargas for feeding the lead

>> Latest Posts

Sandy’s impact on the election

October 31, 2012

Pundits have been speculating re: the impact that Sandy will have on the Presidential election.

Generally, the chatter is about the possibility of low turnout in some swing places like  central city Philly (not sure why) and southwestern Virginia (blizzards).

image

My take: Sandy increases the probability of one possible outcome – that Obama wins the electoral college and Romney wins the popular vote …  maybe by a statistically significant margin.

My logic: The hardest  hit states are all solid Blue: MD, NJ, NY, CT, RI, MA

Obama will undoubtedly carry those states … by big margins.

So, put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is still bailing water out of his basement, or rebuilding his house, or just waiting for the electricity to finally go back on.

Are you going to drop everything and hustle to the polls to cast an insignificant vote?

I wouldn’t … except maybe if there was a close local race that I was interested in.

So, I predict that Obama will win the Sandy states, but by a lesser margin than he would have sans Sandy.

Since the states are major population states, that drop could be significant.

So, it’s entirely possible that Obama ekes out an electoral victory, but loses the popular vote.

Just maybe …

= = = = =
Related:

For a nice recap of the legal aspects of delaying the election, extending hours, etc., see  Could Sandy postpone the election?

>> Latest Posts

Re: Friday’s big number … what to expect (if the BLS doesn’t hide-the-weinie).

October 31, 2012

Hurricane Sandy has put the BLS between a rock and a hard place.

There are 3 scenarios:

1) The BLS hides behind Sandy’s skirt-tails and  takes an incomplete — failing to report the most important number in the most important election … until the election is over.  Just imagine if Obama wins and the BLS reports next week (or next month)  that the unemployment rate went back up to 7.9% or 8% or higher.

2) The BLS rushes a preliminary number that shows the unemployment rate going down to, say,  7.8% … and then revises it upward after the election. Think, the BLS streak of under-reporting initial unemployment claims.

3) The BLS reports that the unemployment rate went down again as still another 850,000 folks find part-time work somewhere, someplace … and, Jack Welch goes nuts.

4)  The BLS reports on time that the unemployment rate went up and Obama orders a DOJ investigation.

* * * * *
My bet: They’ll report on time that the unemployment rate clicked up to 7.9% …  it’s the best “managed” number …. let’s Obama crow that it’s under the magic 8% … and, let’s Romney point out that it’s going in the wrong direction.

Based on the numbers, I’d expect the unemploymen rate to bounce back up to at least 8%.

Here’s my logic…

Initial unemployment claims should track pretty closely with the reported unemployment rate, right?

Well, they do usually … but didn’t last month when the miraculous 7.8% was reported.

Just eyeballing the chart below – which maps the 4-week moving average of initial claims against the unemployment rate – one might have expected an unemployment rate of just over 8% … not 7.8%

Looking forward to this Friday’s unemployment rate … based on the 4-week moving average of initial claims … the unemployment rate should pop back to at least 7.9% … maybe back over over 8%.

That is, unless Welch is right and the BLS is cookin’ the books.

image

>> Latest Posts

Which demo groups is Obama doing better with this time around?

October 31, 2012

Trick question: According to the latest Pew Poll Report , Obama’s support has fallen with all groups (except Democrats”) … from his actual performance in 2008 and his projected performance in 2012.

His biggest drops are among Independents (down 12 percentage points) and young 18-29 voters (down 10 percentage points).

Versus Sen. McCain’s results in 2008, Romney shows modest gains almost across the board.

image

>> Latest Posts

A 269 to 269 scenario … how a tie could happen.

October 30, 2012

WARNING: This is for hard core political junkies.

In a prior post – Trick question: How many electoral votes does Romney need to become President? – I showed that if Romney bagged 269 electoral votes he would become President and that Biden probably would be named VP.

I said the 269 tie was mathematically possible, but didn’t show how.

Martin Leborgne (MSB MBA ’03), a loyal Homa Files reader, replied with a fascinating election analysis that lays out a 269-269 scenario … and a couple of related strategy variations.

Great work, Martin.

* * * * *
Martin Leborgne’s Analysis

The 269/269 electoral split is becoming more and more of a possibility.

Not saying a high probability option … just more and more of an option.

To do that:
1) Romney has to win FL & NC. (fine they’re leaning that way)
2) Mitt also take AZ, while Barack takes NM. (again, leaning that way)
3) Obama wins OH & MI – which as you said in a previous post is relatively likely.
4) Wisconsin goes to Obama
5) VA goes to Mitt
6) CO, IA, and NV also go to Mitt. (We’ll come back to these three.)

Essentially:
Mitt HAS to win CO, IA, NV, VA and FL just to push a 269 tie.
Assuming OH & Wisc goes blue.

So to win:
Romney has to hit those 5 states AND steal one other state.

Obama has to take just two of those states to win -> Wisc + one other.

Ohio certainly changes the landscape of what I’m writing here.

====
BUT if Ohio goes Red: (Again, assuming FL is red) states in play are:
VA, Wisc, Col, IA, and Vegas-Baby!
44 unallocated. BO: 241, MR: 253.

To become the Leader of the Free World with OH and FL red:
MR has to win: 3 out of those 5, ORRRR VA + Wisconsin.
BO has to win: VA + Wisc + one other, ORRRR 4 of those 5.

Punch lines:
Game over of FL is blue.
OH def changes the landscape.
If OH & Wisc go Obama, CO, IA, NV, and VA are a must win for just a shot (269 split here)
If OH & Wisc go Romney, MR will have 263, and will need 7 votes out of NV-6, CO-9, IA-6, and VA-13.

The no-kidding moment:
Things are a lot safer for Romney with OH in Red.

VA(13) and WISC(10) are must-must-must wins.

So with VA and Wisconsin going Red, does Mitt plan to go for OH or concede Ohio and go for 2/3 between IA, NV, and CO?

My thinking: Concede OH. Its uphill. Focus on VA and Wisc  just to make this is a close one.

Then focus on IA and NV.

* * * * *

Whew!  Thanks, Martin.

Any other scenarios out there?

>> Latest Posts

Obama besting Romney in early voting … oh, really?

October 30, 2012

The narrative in the mainstream media the past couple of weeks is that the Obama machine is building an enormous lead over Romney in early voting.

Well, Gallup just released a poll on early voters that seems to debunk the notion.

Here are the key findings …

* * * * *
Only 15% of registered voters  have already voted

… another 18% said they plan to vote early

… and 2/3s said they’ll vote on election day.

image

* * * * *
Early voting in the battleground Midwest (13%) is slightly below the national average (15%)

… the uncontested Obama-West leads the nation with 1/2  voting early.

image

* * * * *
More Republicans than Democrats have voted early

…. Independents are most waiting for election day.

image

* * * * * *

Of those who have voted early, Romney edges Obama 52 to 46.

image

>> Latest Posts

Which pollster was most accurate in 2008 ?

October 30, 2012

Answer: According to a published recap by a poli-sci prof at Fordham University, the pre-election projections from 2 polling organizations — Rasmussen and Pew —were right on the money in 2008.

Note that Gallup was near the bottom of the list … joined by the big media organizations – CBS, Reuters, ABC, NBC, WSJ, and Newsweek – which finished dead last.

* * * * *

Fordham University: Poll Accuracy in the 2008 Presidential Election

image

IMPORTANT: See the post Update: Which pollster was most accurate in 2008 ? for Fordham’s final study … the reslts changed.

>> Latest Posts

Maybe I was too pessimistic on Ohio …

October 29, 2012

Last week  I said “Romney hasn’t led in any Ohio polls.

Strike that, as of today.

Most recent Rasmussen poll has Romney up by 2 points, and hitting the magic 50% number.

While Rasmussen is typically thought to lean right, it was the most accurate poll in the 2008 election … more on that tomorrow.

PS Have you noticed the media burst today re: Wisconsin as the new Ohio?  For the record, HomaFiles was on that one last Friday … ahead of the curve.

image

>> Latest Posts

BLS may delay Friday employment report … are you kidding me?

October 29, 2012

I guess when the announcement went out that”only essential Federal employees need report”, the folks at the BLS rolled over and went back to sleep.

According to the WSJ

“… government statisticians and others may not be able complete the preparation of the jobs report before scheduled release time later this week.due to the weather and associated power outages and transportation disruptions.”

Why do I not find this surprising?

Memo to BLS: Get your stupid butts to the office, order a stack of pizzas, and crank until the gov’t emergency generators stop cranking power to your computers.

Somebody pass to the word to Jack Welch, ok?

Trick question: How many electoral votes does Romney need to become President?

October 29, 2012

If you answered  270  … you’re wrong.

The correct answer is 269.

And, if Romney prevails with 269 electoral votes, there’s a quirky possibility that Biden could be his VP.

* * * * *
What if Obama & Romney tie at 269 ?

Given the 2012 swing states, it is unlikely , but mathematically possible for Obama and Romney to each win 269 electoral votes.

As we’ve posted before, a tie would be resolved in the House (for President) and in the Senate (for Vice President).

Practically every pundit and pollster is predicting that the GOP will win a majority of states in the House.

  • Important technical note: the new House & Senate get sworn in on January 3rd source and hold a joint session on January 6th to “count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote” source

So, in the case of a tie, the House would pick the President … and, assuming that the GOP wins the House, Romney wins with 269 electoral votes

* * * * *
What about the Vice Presidency ?

Remember, the Senate picks the VP.

I’d been assuming that the Senate would certify Ryan if there was a tie … regardless of whether Dems or GOP win the Senate

I overlooked a major factor: the Vice President also holds another postion — President of the Senate.

That’s a largely ceremonial role … except that the VP votes to breaks ties in Senate votes.

That’s why things get interesting.

* * * * *
What if the Senate-elect is tied 50-50

If there’s a tie and the GOP wins the Senate … Ryan gets the VP slot.

If the Dems win the Senate by a couple of seats, my bet is that they would allow Ryan to prevail rather than set-up a ridiculous Romney-Biden pairing.

After all, Romney would just deploy Joe to supermarket openings and state funerals.

But,if the Senate-elect is split 50-50, then the VP slot becomes very meaningful.

Remember that the VP is the President of the Senate and votes to break ties.

Here’s a quirk: Biden – as sitting VP – would get a vote on who wins – him or Ryan.

And, in a 50-50 Senate, there are likely to be a lot of ties … making the President of the Senate position very important.

So, you gotta expect that Biden would vote for himself – as VP – but, more meaningfully, as President of the Senate.

Bingo.  A Romney-Biden scenario.

>> Latest Posts

Big swing in President’s job approval numbers …

October 28, 2012

Obama’s job approval numbers have dropped significantly in the past  week … into the mid-40s … in both the Gallup & Rasmussen daily tracking polls.

He has been underwater by a point or two in Rasmussen for the past couple of weeks.

But, he was riding 50-plus approval numbers in Gallup until the past couple of days … so the drop in that survey is big news.

Why is this a big deal?

Pundits’ wisdom is than an incumbent’s vote ceiling is his job approval number going into the election … and, if it’s below 50, that’s obviously bad news.

What might explain the drop?

Couple of hypotheses:

1) Obama’s negative campaigning and quirky ads (e.g. “First Time”) this week may have turned some folks off.

2) Benghazi-gate may be catching up to him … especially the dead Seal’s father going public with his disappointment on Obama’s reaction.

3) The giant thud heard when he released his 20-page glossy economic plan

4) The polls may be whacky … especially Gallup, which has been very erratic since it changed its methodology a month or so ago.

* * * * *
Focus on the polls since Oct. 23 … toss out the CBS poll which is broadly considered a partisan outlier. 

image

“Trawling college campuses for political jailbait” … ouch

October 27, 2012

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder … and that one’s perspective on marketing campaigns depends on where they stand.

President Obama’s most recent ad – explicitly analogizing first-time voting to first-time sex  — has caused a bit of a stir.

image

Dems surrogates are saying it’s clever, edgy, clutter-breaking … and well targeted.

One conservative writer said: “Obama is largely reduced to trawling college campuses for political jailbait … in the increasingly desperate hope of getting at least a few salvageable video clips out of each day.”

We report, you decide.

>> Latest Posts

Nate Silver: Mitt’s momentum has stopped … oh, really?

October 26, 2012

The New York Times’ Nate Silver will emerge from this election as either the greatest predictor ever … or as a complete dufass.

We’re posting his column from yesterday so that we have it in the Homa Files archives …

We’ll know in 12 days, Nate.

image

>> Latest Posts

Countering Springsteen …

October 26, 2012

… with Meat Loaf.

According to the Toledo Blade, a Romney event in Defiance, Ohio “featuring” Meat Loaf drew a crowd of 12,000.

image

Raises a couple of questions:

1, Did they come to see Mr. Romney or Mr. Loaf?

2. Do you think his friends call him “Meat” or “Loaf” or something else?

3. Seriously, did you know the Meat Loaf was still alive?

4. Can you name Meat Loaf’s biggest hit? Any of his other hits?

Answer: click to see Top Ten Best Meat Loaf Songs

>> Latest Posts

Forget Ohio … watch Wisconsin.

October 26, 2012

If Mitt’s route to the White House is through Ohio, I’m not optimistic for him … for 5 reasons:

* * * * *
1. Romney isn’t leading in any of the Ohio polls.

image

* * * * *
2. Romney is doing well in affluent suburbs … and, Ohio doesn’t have many of them.

Insightful analysis by Michael Barone:

A pro-Romney affluent swing is confirmed by the internals of some national polls.

Post-debate Pew Research and Battleground polls have shown Romney carrying affluent suburbanites  by statistically significant margins.

In particular, college-educated women seem to have swung toward Romney.

That tends to validate a scenario that Mitt Romney fares much better in affluent suburbs

This also helps explain why Romney still narrowly trails in Ohio polls.

Affluent suburban counties cast about one-quarter of the votes in, say,  Pennsylvania and Michigan but only one-eighth in Ohio.

* * * * *
3. Obama’s early negative ad blitz worked in Ohio.

This is strictly anecdotal – from a small, non-projectable sample of friends & relatives in Cleveland.

They bought into Obama’s ad blitz demonizing  Romney – they believe that he’ll stop their social security checks if elected.

Now, they’ve got ad fatigue and actively resist political commercials.

They’re classic uninformed voters. They get their news for the local NBC affiliate, so they haven’t even heard of Benghazi or the fiscal cliff.

Obama has them locked.

* * * * *

4. Neither Gov. Kasich nor Sen. candidate Mandel are factors

I think Kasich  is doing a good job balancing the budget and attracting business … Ohio’s unemployment rate is below the national average.

But, he’s only marginally popular because he has taken on the unions.

And, it doesn’t appear that he has a political apparatus in place to spur GOTV activity.

Mandel seems like a reasonable kid, but isn’t going to be a poll magnet

* * * * *

5. The auto bailout is a simple, compelling story

Like it or hate it, people get it.

In a campaign with a lot of complicated issues, this is one folks can understand.

Simple message: Obama authorized the $$$, favored the unions, more people have jobs.

It’s a tough message to sell against.

* * * * *

One Ohio bright spot for Romney

The best I can muster is that Obama only hits 50% in one poll … even the flakey Time poll only has him at 49%.

Conventional wisdom says that the undecideds break for the challenger … especially if he has some mo going.

What I’m watching: for Romney to take an Ohio lead in Rasmussen or Suffolk (only polls I really trust) … and then hit a 50% in one of them.

I call it a longshot.

* * * * *
Why Wisconsin could break for Romney

First, the case against Romney in Wisconsin: trailing in all the polls, Obama at 50% in Rasmussen, Madison is a huge liberal hotbed – with a gazillion students ready to vote.

image

So, why do I think Wisconsin could break for Romney?

Basically, it’s the inverse of the Ohio logic:

1. Gov. Walker is a force – a winner.

2. Polls said Walker would barely escape the recall … he rolled up big numbers.

3. Tommy Thompson (former Governor) is popular and knows how to win … he may pull voters in.

4. More favorable demographics for Romney – more traditional Midwest values, more affluent suburbs than Ohio.

5. Wisconsin voters didn’t get the summer barrage of Obama’s “Romney is the devil” ads.

6. Obama dissed the unions during the recall election … I’m betting that they don’t forget.

* * * * *

Bottom line

I’m betting Mitt’s road to the White House goes through Wisconsin not Ohio.

>> Latest Posts

Morning line: The latest Presidential polls …

October 26, 2012

The betting books still have Obama 2 to 1

image

* * * * *

The RCP average is Romney up by about a point.

But, the polls from this week have Romney up by 2 points … with only ! poll (IBS) having Obama in the lead.

Romney hits 50% in 3 of the polls …

image

>> Latest Posts

Contrasting styles …

October 25, 2012

Iowa is a swing state.

The Des Moines Register is expected to endorse Obama on Sunday.

Here’s  today’s front page from the Register …

 

image

>> Latest Posts

Blame it on Mr. Bill … say, what?

October 25, 2012

Holy alibi, Batman.

Circle October 24, 2012 on your calendars.

image

It’s the day that the NY Times posted to the official record “How Bill Clinton May Have Hurt the Obama Campaign”:

there is one crucial way in which the 42nd president (Clinton) may not have served the 44th (Obama) quite as well.

In these final weeks before the election, Mr. Clinton’s expert advice about how to beat Mitt Romney is starting to look suspect.

…  just after Mr. Romney locked up the Republican nomination, Mr. Obama’s team abruptly switched its strategy for how to define him.

Up to then, the White House had been portraying Mr. Romney … as inauthentic and inconstant, a soulless climber who would say anything to get the job.

But it was Mr. Clinton who forcefully argued to Mr. Obama’s aides that the campaign had it wrong.

The best way to go after Mr. Romney, the former president said, was to publicly grant that he was the “severe conservative” he claimed to be, and then hang that unpopular ideology around his neck.

Ever since, the Obama campaign has been hammering Mr. Romney as too conservative, while essentially giving him a pass for having traveled a tortured path on issues like health care reform, abortion and gay rights.

It’s not hard to understand why Mr. Obama and his advisers took Mr. Clinton’s advice to heart; to disregard it would be like telling Derek Jeter, “Hey man, appreciate the input, but I think I know how to make that flip play from the hole just fine on my own.”

For a while this summer and into the fall, the Obama-Clinton strategy seemed to be working flawlessly.

But in recent weeks, starting with the first debate, the challenger has made a brazen and frantic dash to the center, and Mr. Obama has often seemed off-balance, as if stunned that Mr. Romney thinks he can get away with such an obvious change of course so late in the race.

Which, apparently, he can.

Couple of questions:

1. Wasn’t it Bill Clinton who stole the show at the DNC and gave Obama’s campaign some oomph?

2. Wasn’t that Bill Clinton (with Springsteen) revving up the crowds in Ohio?

3. Didn’t Hillary just fall on her sword to protect Obama in the Benghazi mess?

4. Isn’t it a bit early to start pinning the blame for a loss?

Of course, I’m hoping that the Times knows something that I don’t … and the election is a fait accompli.

>> Latest Posts

“I inherited the deficit” … say, what?

October 25, 2012

Draw your own conclusion, but looks to me like Obama inherited a $500 billion deficit

…. goosed it by a trillion dollars to kinda stimulate the economy

… and has hung well over a trillion dollars, way after the Stimulus.

What’s he talking about?

image
Source: Hot Air.com

* * * * *

While we’re at it, note how the current recovery stacks up against prior recession recoveries …

image
Source: Hot Air.com

>> Latest Posts

Compare the economic recovery plans …

October 25, 2012

Seriously, before you vote, at least glance at the plans being offered by Obama and Romney.

You decide which is substantial and which is fluff ..

* * * * *

click to view very short video intro

click to view plan

image

click to see Business Insider’s summary of the plan’s highlights:
Obama Has Released A 27-Point Plan For His Second Term, And It’s A Doozy

* * * * *

click to view

image

click to see Business Insider’s summary or Romney’s plan
Here’s Everything We Know Now About Mitt Romney’s Economic Plan

>> Latest Posts

Education: “Under my leadership … starting to finally make progress.” … say, what?

October 24, 2012

During the last debate, Obama declared:

  • ”You know, under my leadership, what we’ve done is reformed education, working with governors, 46 states. We’ve seen progress and gains in schools that were having a terrible time. And they’re starting to finally make progress.”

Ezra Klein – overexposed (and over-rated) liberal WashPost writer tried to prove the point for his favorite President … presenting reading and math scores for the past 20 years.

For reading, Klein concludes:

  • “For eighth grade reading, students did better on NAEP, the gold standard for the quantitative measurement of student learning, in 2011 than in 2009, but fourth-grade scores were unchanged.”

Ken concludes:

  • For 4th graders, reading scores improved by 4% under Bush’s much maligned “No Student Left Behind” program (NSLB) … from 213 to 221 … and haven’t budged under Obama’s “Race to the Top” (RTTT)
  • For 8th graders. reading scores have been essentially flat-lined for the past 15 years, with neither NSLB or RTTT having moved the needle.

* * * * * *

For math, Klein concludes:

  • “Math scores significantly improved across the board (under Obama).

Ken concludes:

  • For 4th graders, math scores improved by 7% under Bush’s much maligned “No Student Left Behind” program (NSLB) … from 226 to 240 … and increased by 1 measly point under Obama’s “Race to the Top” (RTTT)
  • For 8th graders. math scores improved by 4% under Bush’s much maligned “No Student Left Behind” program (NSLB) … from 273 to 283 … and increased by 1 measly point under Obama’s “Race to the Top” (RTTT)

* * * * *

Bottom line:

1) Tell me again why No Child Left Behind was so bad?

2) Maybe Klein should take the math test.

>> Latest Posts

He’s back … and, wants you to make his day.

October 24, 2012

After his quirky empty chair splash at the RNC, Clint has resurfaced in swing state ads.

click to view

image

>> Latest Posts

Morning line: Intrade @ 55-45

October 24, 2012

Obama’s “futures” sold-off on Intrade after his debate “win” on Monday …

Interesting, since the stock market sold off, too … recently, the relationship has been an  inverse.

image

* * * * *

Side note: Just me, or was all the debate chatter yesterday about horses & bayonets?

>> Latest Posts

Gallup: “It’s the economy, stupid.”

October 24, 2012

Based on the most recent Gallup poll, the economy ranks – clear and away – the top issue on both men’s and women’s minds these days.

image

* * * * *

And, according to the latest WJ-NBC poll, Romney leads on the economic issues …

image

>> Latest Posts

Obama to Biden: “Shut up.”

October 24, 2012

Not really.

But, I was surprised during the debate what Obama said when talking about the decision to whack Bin Laden:

  • “… decisions are not always popular. Those decisions generally — generally are not poll-tested. And even some in my own party, including my current vice president, had the same critique as you did.” Transcript

image

There have been reports that Biden was a no vote.

Obama wasn’t asked the question, so I wonder why Obama outted his foreign relations guru VP during the debate?

>> Latest Posts

Romney & Obama wield Mean Girls GIFs, pumpkin bread recipes & Spotify playlists

October 24, 2012

Punch line:In 2012, it is not enough for candidates to shake some hands, kiss a baby or two and run some TV ads. They also need to be posting funny pictures on Tumblr and snarky comments on Twitter.

* * * * *

Excerpted from The New York Times’, “Campaigns Use Social Media to Lure Younger Voters”

Social-media-reacts-Who-won-Wednesday-nights-election

If the presidential campaigns of 2008 were dipping a toe into social media like Facebook and Twitter, their 2012 versions are well into the deep end.

At stake, the campaigns say they believe, are votes from citizens, particularly younger ones, who may not watch television or read the paper but spend plenty of time on the social Web.

The techniques may be relatively new, but they are based on some old-fashioned political principles … “The more people you talk to, the more likely you are to win” .

“It’s about authentic, two-way communication,” said Adam Fetcher, deputy press secretary for the Obama campaign.

“Social media is a natural extension of our massive grass-roots organization.”

Though the returns on such efforts are not easily quantifiable, neither party is taking any chances.

Edit by JDC

>> Latest Posts

Debate: Day after thoughts …

October 23, 2012

The broad stroke: B-O-R-I-N-G.  Yeah, Obama landed more punches … but he didn’t knock Romney out, didn’t knock him to the canvas, didn’t even give him wobbly knees … won’t stop Romney’s momentum.

My analogy: It was like a basketball game … Romney was sitting on a lead, taking the air out of the ball … Obama was scrambling trying to cause turnovers … whenever Obama fouled, Romney made the free throws … so, Obama won the 4th quarter (i.e. the last debate) … but not the game (the debate series)

Random thoughts:

  1. Wonder what the ratings will be … I was flipping between the debate and Bears-Lions … how many folks were like me?  Or worse, simply switched on MNF or the NLCS game 7 …  I’m into this stuff and I lost interest.
  2. General theme: Middle East is an insolvable mess ..  well-intended support for democracy (i.e. anti-dictators) has backfired … now, an entire region is controlled by out-of-control gangs with weak governments that are either in cahoots or ineffective … if it weren’t for the oil, most people wouldn’t care.
  3. Candi Crowley’s attempt to help Obama backfired … Romney didn’t have to relitigate Libya since it has been on the news for the past week … and since the press is stuck following up on the story … the Libya mess helped Romney by weakening Obama’s foreign policy advantage … now, back to the economy.
  4. I’m struck by how Obama heaped the Libya mess on himself … classic unforced errors – trying to be “too cute by half” … he didn’t have to start saying “al Qaeda is extinguished”, or on the run or whatever … folks would have bought “weakened but still a threat” … and honesty would have worked with Benghazi “Tried to keep Marines out of Libya, thought security was adequate … obviously, it wasn’t … caused a serious tragedy … redouble efforts to make sure it doesn’t happen again” … folks would have bought that, too … anybody with a pulse (don’t even need a brain) knows the area is a mess with a bunch of crazies running around … Instead, Libya became an issue and made Obama look like he was lying – even if he wasn’t.
  5. For me, most interesting was switching back from the Bears game … sometimes with the mute button on … Romney looked fatigued but Presidential … Obama looked ruffled – eyes darting, grimaces, goofy smile … I bet that’s an impression many folks drew.
  6. Based on CNN instpolls, Romney emerged as likeable as Obama (48 to 47) … and, “accepting as commander-in-chief” (60%) … soccer moms didn’t see a war mongering son-of-George Bush.
  7. Obama’s best line (“horses and bayonets”) will, in fact backfire … folks in ship-building areas (Norfolk & Portsmouth Virginia) probably want to keep their jobs alive for awhile … remember, VA is a swing state.
  8. Surprised that Obama kept teeing up economic issues … gave Romney legitimacy to repeat his powerful riff on the economy … didn’t Obama think that Romney would be ready re: the auto bailouts?
  9. Strongest Mitt line might have legs: “Attacking me isn’t an agenda for the future” … gets Obama for not having a plan and plays to the women who reportedly don’t like the negative stuff.
  10. Is “keep on truckin’” something you want to hear a President say in a national debate?

Civility has taken a hit … and debates will never be the same … from now on, they will be cage matches with the crowd screaming for blood.   When channel surfing the other nite, I stopped for a few minutes on C-Span’s replay of the Elder Bush- Dukakis debate … issues were about the same, policy differences were about the same, but demeanor of both guys was, uh, civil and presidential.  Will never happen again.

* * * * *
Great analyst quotesfrom the UK Telegraph

The President wheeled out what must have seemed like a great, pre-planned zinger: “I think Governor Romney maybe hasn’t spent enough time looking at how our military works …  Well, governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military’s changed.”

The audience laughed, Obama laughed, It was funny.

But, Twitter immediately lit up with examples of how the US Army does still use horses and bayonets (horses were used during the invasion of Afghanistan).

Romney sucked up Obama’s abuse and retained a rigid poker face all night.

He looked like a Commander in Chief; Obama looked like a lawyer.

Who would you rather vote for?

Romney tried his darnedest to bring everything back to the economy and Obama seemed to say in every answer, “So what we need to do in the Middle East is talk more about how rubbish my opponent is.”

It’s almost lucky that Obama isn’t running unopposed in this election because then he’d have nothing to run on at all.

The real difference was in style. In his closing statement – after Obama was done making the Ace of Spades disappear – Romney channelled Reagan by looking straight into the camera and asserting his faith in America.

It was empty, sugary stuff that will make liberals sick. But it was infinitely preferable to Obama’s constant, nasty attacks. Sometimes in life, the nice guys do win.

>> Latest Posts

What did Mitt say about the auto bailout? … “Check the record”

October 23, 2012

In the last debate , Obama challenged folks to “check the record” re: what Romney said about the auto bailouts.

Ok, we did … and it’s very interesting.

Obama was talking about a 2008 op-ed in the NY Times.

image

Yeah, the op-ed was titled “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt”.

That’s inflammatory since most folks think that “bankrupt” and “go out of business” are synonymous.

They’re not.

Bankruptcy is a process for stabilizing a failing company … not necessarily – and not usually – a liquidation (think practically every airline).

Romney was arguing that GM should go through the process and follow the in-place bankruptcy laws … rather than having the Feds dictate the terms for winners & losers.

What Romney opposed was dishing bailout checks … and letting taxpayers pick up the tab.

Specifically, he said “Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check. “

His plan had a couple of basic components:

  1. New labor agreements to neutralize the $2,000 per car cost disadvantage
  2. New management from best of breed non-automotive industries (think Alan Mulally – the turnaround guy that Ford got from Boeing)
  3. A new labor-management relationship … “Getting more and more pay for less and less work is a dead-end street.”
  4. A strong dealer network … “When sales are down, you don’t want to lose the only people who can get them to grow. “
  5. $20 billion in gov’t funded research … “done at universities, at research labs and even through public-private collaboration.”
  6. “The federal government should also rectify the imbedded tax penalties that favor foreign carmakers. “
  7. “The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.”

In short, “a managed bankruptcy … not a bailout check.”

No mention of letting the industry die.

Obama better hope that nobody in Ohio or Michigan takes his advice and checks the record.

* * * * *

While we’re at it … yes, there were winners – mostly members of the UAW.

And there were losers like:

  • GM bondholders (think retirees and widows) whose secured loans were subordinated to the UAW
  • The 20,000 non-union Delphi salaried retirees, who lost their pensions and benefits programs as they were headed into retirement
  • The profitable GM dealerships that were closed because they spoke out against the Fed’s bailout process (I personally know the principles of one such dealership in Baltimore).
  • US taxpayers who are still holding the bag for the $25 billion bailout Source

Again, Obama better hope that nobody in Ohio or Michigan takes his advice and checks the record.

>> Latest Posts

Interesting polling factoid …

October 22, 2012

RealClearPolitics included 7 polls in it’s poll=of-polls today … 4 have Romney leading, 2 have Obama leading, and 1 is a tie.

The 2 that have Obama leading are co-sponsored by conservative publications: Investor’s Business Daily and the Washington Times.

Go figure …

image

>> Latest Posts

Obama’s social media barrage …

October 22, 2012

According to AdAge

Obama is out slugging Romney in digital with 93% ‘Share of Voice’ in Online Ads.

The Barack Obama and Mitt Romney camps may be emptying their war chests this month to go head-to-head in TV spots in swing states, but the online battle is a more lopsided affair.

According to research by the analytics company Moat, the Obama campaign had a 93.3% share of voice in terms of display-impression volume in September across the top 20,000 publishers, compared with the Romney campaign’s 6.7%.

Obama had 497 creative executions deployed across the web compared with the Romney camp’s 90.

30% of the Obama ads have a Yahoo Genome tag, which “suggests use of audience and data targeting.”

The top five domains where President Obama’s ads were spotted in that period were NYTimes.com, RR.com, Oprah.com, Reference.com and Yahoo.com.

Romney’s top five were AOL.com, RR.com, Chow.com, GameSpot.com and Maxpreps.com.

The scale and sophistication of the Obama campaign’s digital ad operation should come as no surprise … the campaign opened a “tech field office” in San Francisco last winter that’s staffed largely by volunteers who work around their day jobs.

Romney’s digital director acknowledged that his side is being outspent on digital, but said that they’re trying to win by purchasing efficiently and working with third-party vendors to identify key buckets of voters in swing state.

“If [they] have money to burn … good for them … It’s a spray-and-pray model.”

““Obama had 27 million followers on his Facebook page, we had less than 5 million … But when the ruling came, we saw 27% engagement with our audience while they only got 1.5%.”

The post-mortem to this election will be interesting … both from a political perspective and re: target marketing and digital media.

Obama’s team is clearly at the forefront of using technology to pinpoint people, dope them out psychographically, and get to them through digital means … Romney’s team is pretty “old school”, largely relying on traditional research and methods.

Only complicator is that Obama is spending lots of $$$ on that old school stuff, too … so might be had to sort out which of his marketing techniques are delivering.

And, of course, the product and message matter, too …

>> Latest Posts

Update: What happens if no presidential candidate gets 270 electoral votes?

October 22, 2012

Back in January, Homa Files posted the answer to the question.

At the time, it looked like Ron Paul might make a run as a 3rd party candidate, potentially being a spoiler, depriving Obama or Romney of the necessary 270 electoral votes.

Well, Paul is out of the picture … but there’s increased chatter that Obama and Romney could end up tied in electoral votes.

So, what happens if neither presidential candidate gets 270 electoral votes?

As we reported in January, according to the Electoral College web site …

If no candidate receives a majority of electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most electoral votes. Each State delegation has one vote.

The Senate would elect the Vice President from the 2 Vice Presidential candidates with the most electoral votes, with each Senator casting one vote for Vice President.

Note that for President, each state gets one vote in the House … not each rep.  So a majority of each state’s reps determine the state’s vote.

And, yes, it’s possible that the tickets could be split.

For example, the GOP House-elect would certainly pick Mitt … and the Senate Dem majority could select Biden … and certainly would if the Senate-elect is split 50-50 between Dems and GOP.   For details, see our post Trick question: How many electoral votes does Romney need to become President?

* * * * *

Click here for a short video: What If the Presidential Election is a Tie?

image

>> Latest Posts

An indicator of voter enthusiasm … and network cred.

October 22, 2012

What people watch is – in my opinion – an indicator of their preferences … since folks tend to read & watch stuff that is consistent with their beliefs.

And, the numbers of people watching is a rough indicator of intensity – how many folks are on the wavelength.

So, let’s look at recent cable news ratings …

Fox primetime averages about 3.5 million viewers … MSNBC about 1.5  … and CNN under 750k.

Note that Stewart & Colbert get  categorized as news shows (which still makes me scratch my head) … outdraws MSNBC and creams CNN.

Fox drawing more than double MSNBC has got to be good news for Romney … Comedy Central’s draw must be good news for Obama.

My prediction: Candi Crowley’s debate performance – interjecting herself into the Benghazi challenge, interrupting Mitt 26 times, giving Obama 9% more air time – will hurt her credibility as a newsperson and certainly won’t help CNN’s constant claim of being an unbiased source of news. That network’s slide will continue.

image
Reprinted from Drudge

>> Latest Posts

WSJ/NBC: Post-debate bounce … for Romney

October 21, 2012

According to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll  released Sunday …

Romney Surges to Tie Obama in National Poll

A late surge in support for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has put him in a dead heat with President Barack Obama.

Among likely voters, the candidates are now tied, 47% to 47%.

Mr. Romney has pulled abreast of the president for the first time all year in the Journal poll, erasing a three-point lead among likely voters that Mr. Obama had in late September.

Mr. Romney’s surge followed his strong debate performance in Denver early this month and a contentious second debate with Mr. Obama last week.

Hmmm

>> Latest Posts

It’s not Candy’s fault that Barack speaks slowly … say, what?

October 21, 2012

According to TMZ

CNN’s Managing Editor, Mark Whitaker, sent out an internal email praising Candy Crowley and trying to blunt criticism that she was unfair to Mitt Romney.

“Let’s start with a big round of applause for Candy Crowley for a superb job under the most difficult circumstances imaginable.

She and her team had to select and sequence questions in a matter of hours, and then she had to deal with the tricky format, the nervous questioners, the aggressive debaters, all while shutting out the pre-debate attempts to spin and intimidate her.

She pulled it off masterfully.

The reviews on Candy’s performance have been overwhelmingly positive but Romney supporters are going after her on two points, no doubt because their man did not have as good a night as he had in Denver.

On the legitimacy of Candy fact-checking Romney on Obama’s Rose Garden statement, it should be stressed that she was just stating a point of fact: Obama did talk about an act (or acts) of terror, no matter what you think he meant by that at the time.

On why Obama got more time to speak, it should be noted that Candy and her commission producers tried to keep it even but that Obama went on longer largely because he speaks more slowly.

We’re going to do a word count to see whether, as in Denver, Romney actually got more words in even if he talked for a shorter period of time.”

The dude failed to mention that Crowley walked back her “facts” … saying in the post-game show that Romney was “right in the main” … nor did he mention that after the debate, Obama told the town hall questioned a different truth.

A “word count” ???

You just can’t make this stuff up.

>> Latest Posts

What does Vegas say?

October 20, 2012

That’s the question a loyal posed in response to our post The state of the race … 3 views.

Well, Vegas doesn’t take bets on the Presidential election, so best we can do is PredictWise … which averages Intrade and Betfair

Of course, these odds are heavily influenced by the polls.

image

>> Latest Posts

The state of the race … 3 views.

October 20, 2012

With a little more than 2 weeks to go in the Presidential race ….

Gallup’s daily tracking survey reported that Romney’s lead widened to 7-points … 52% to 45%.

image

Karl Rove (hard right, of course) was on talk shows yesterday saying that no candidate who has been over 50% on Gallup 3 weeks out has ever lost the general election.

Nate Silver (New York Times, hard left) was leading the charge to debunk Gallup.  More on Nate below

* * * * *

RealClearPolitics poll-of-polls had Romney up by a point at 47.7%

image

But, RealClearPolitics had a major change in it’s electoral votes recap.

For the first time it’s tally of “likely & leans” states had Romney in the lead … 206 to 201.

image

When toss-up states (i.e. those within the margins of errors) are assigned to candidates, Obama maintains a narrowing lead 294 to 244.

image

* * * * *

Nate Silver of the New York Times is the self-anointed gold standard of polling and darling of the left.

He throws a lot of numbers around … says he’s unbiased … but seems to have a penchant for cherry-picking.

Case in point: the Gallup results.

Silver’s prediction model weights Gallup pretty high … 12%.

image

But, since Gallup didn’t give the answer that Nate liked this week, he wrote an article titled “Gallup vs. the World” that said Gallup performs poorly when out of the consensus … so, it should be discounted or dismissed as an outlier.

In fact, he went counter Gallup and increased Obama’s chances of winning the Electoral College to 65.7 percent from 64.8 percent.

More specifically, he pegged the Electoral College at 292 to 246 … roughly in line with RCP’s no leaners scenario.

image

And, Silver continued to show Obama leading in the popular vote by 1.5 points … with a majority.

image

* * * * *

OK, with these markers set, we’ll circle back on these surveys after the election.

>> Latest Posts

The Al Smith dinner … funny stuff.

October 19, 2012

Dennis Miller has been on the campaign trail with Romney this week.  I’m betting that he wrote much of Mitt’s Al Smith roast material … it’s pretty funny with a bit of edge.

Here’s the video … worth watching.  My fav punch lines are below.

  • “Usually I get invited to events like this to be the designated driver.”
  • “This show is brought to you by the letter O and the number 16 trillion”
  • Re: debate prep: “I just abstain from alcohol for 65 years.”
  • Re: debate: “Big Bird never saw it coming.”
  • Overheard Pres. Obama: “So little time, so much to redistribute”.
  • “Polls are now showing Obama leading from behind”
  • Obama to the Pope: “Just blame everything on John Paul II”
  • Obama to voters: “Are you better off now than you were 4 weeks ago”
  • Tomorrow’s headline: “Obama engages Catholics, Romney dines with rich people.”
  • “There’ more to life …”

 

>> Latest Posts

Mixed signals from Gallup …

October 19, 2012

OK, we know I’m rooting for Mitt … so I like the “horse race” reporting that he leads Obama by 7 points and has a majority.

But … and it’s a big but … that measure doesn’t seem to sync with Gallup’s daily Presidential Approval survey … which has Obama at 50% approval.

So, 50% approve of the job he’s doing, but only 44% are going to vote for him?

Can be rationalized that some folks think Obama is doing a good job but that Mitt would do a better job … but that’s a stretch.

Gallup changed its approval methodology when they got poked by Axlerod and threatened by Holder & the DOJ … immediately after the methodology changed, Obama’s approval numbers improved.

I can’t decode whether Gallup changed the horse race survey methods, too.

Bottom line: results are very curious.

I’d be feeling more relaxed if the approval and election numbers were in sync.

 

image

 

image

>> Latest Posts

A post-debate head scratcher..

October 19, 2012

As we predicted, Libya monopolized the airwaves yesterday.

Most of the chatter had to do with whether Crowley was proper injecting herself into the debate as an arbiter of fact … and whether she had the facts right.

With regards to the latter point, it was widely reported that Pres. Obama approached the town hall questioner and fessed up that he hadn’t called it a terrorist attack.

According to the Washington Post:

“After the debate, the president came over  and spent about two minutes with me privately,” says 61-year-old Kelly Ladka.

According to Ladka, Obama gave him ”more information about why he delayed calling the attack a terorist attack.”

For background, Obama did apparently lump Benghazi into a reference to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden address. However, he spent about two weeks holding off on using the full “terrorist” designation.

The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the “intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation,” recalls Ladka.

Mr. Ladka popped up on most cable networks yesterday repeating the story.

One anchor pumped Mr. Ladka re: who he was going to vote for.

Ladka described the anxiety he faced as an undecided voter – he wasn’t sure – and, he knew it was an important election.

Then it dawned on me … the dude lives in New York.

His vote doesn’t matter one iota since Obama will landslide New York.

Which raises another question: why the heck was the town hall of undecided voters held in New York, instead of Ohio or another swing state?

Maybe it’s more evidence that the questioners were mere props for the event.

>> Latest Posts

Hoisted by their own pitards … BLS unemployment claims are in.

October 18, 2012

Last week, Team Obama was crowing about the huge drop in initial unemployment claims … proof poitive that the recovery was gaining steam.

They failed to mention the fact that the state of California sat on a pile of claims … making the numbers look better than they really were.

Well, as Rev. Wright would say, the chickens have come home to roost.

According to the BLS: “In the week ending October 13, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 388,000, an increase of 46,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 342,000.”

Oops.

Headline: “Jobless claims increase 46,000”

Not exactly proof positive of an economy gaining steam.

My bet, Team Obama emphasizes that claims are overstated because of California.

Too bad.

* * * * *
And, yes … the BLS streak — understating initial claims – continued.

Now we’re up to at least 23 election season weeks in a row that the BLS’s “headline number” has under-reported the number of initial unemployment claims … and cast the jobs situation as brighter than it really is.

Based on today’s BLS report, the number for the week ending October 6  was revised upward from 339,000 to 342,000.

C’mon guys … get it right already.

image

>> Latest Posts

The “Biden Effect” …

October 18, 2012

Hot off the presses …

Gallup’s tracking has Romney up by 7 … 52% to 45%

Expect for Gallup to get calls from Axlerod and Holder …

image

The election in a nutshell … maybe jobs don’t matter as much any more!

October 18, 2012

There’s a sobering,  must read editorial in the WSJ today … Can Government Benefits Turn an Election?

Here are key points …

The federal government’s 120 means-tested programs today provide $1 trillion of benefits.

  • Unemployment insurance has stretched to 99 weeks
  • Record numbers of unemployed have qualified for disability benefits
  • Food stamps recipients have increase 40% to almost 50 million

The spending for these programs has grown 2½ times faster during the Obama presidency than in any other comparable period in American history.

To what extent might these benefits not just foster dependency but also make the economy’s performance seem less of a deciding factor in voters’ choices?

If you are concerned about your well-being and worried about a failed recovery — but getting new help from the government— do you vote for the candidate who promises more jobs or do you support the candidate who promises more government benefits?

Voters have historically set high standards and voted out incumbents not because they personally disliked them.

Rather, they’ve elected a new president because they understood the importance of a strong economy to their jobs, their income and the future prospects of their children.

Based on the economy, Mr. Obama should lose on Nov. 6. Yet it seems implausible that tens of millions of Americans who have received additional government benefits during his presidency can be completely unaffected by that largess. The election will test the relative power of private-sector aspirations and public-sector dependence.

Based on the economy, Mr. Obama should lose on Nov. 6.

Yet it seems implausible that tens of millions of Americans who have received additional government benefits during his presidency can be completely unaffected by that largess.

The election will test the relative power of private-sector aspirations and public-sector dependence.

Keep in mind that most jobs being created are relatively low paying service sector jobs … an increasing number of which are part-time … in part of duck Fed regulations and taxes (think, ObamaCare).

To get a visceral sense of the electoral “tension”, read Threats to Assassinate Romney Explode After Debate.

And, consider that an increasing number of folks feel that they are paying their fair  share (or more) with the government wasting much or most of the taxes it takes in …   what if those folks decide it’s not worth 60 hour weeks any more any more and shift into neutral?

This year’s election won’t be the end of the process … regardless of the outcome.

>> Latest Posts

The debate …

October 17, 2012

My morning-after thoughts, for what they’re worth …

  1. First, I didn’t learn anything … except that Obama’s 401-K has some mutual funds with foreign stocks … who cares?
  2. The town hall format was a sham … Crowley picked the questions … people were used as props — then ignored  … wonder what questions didn’t get asked?
  3. I scored the overall to Obama … but not by much … so, I wasn’t surprised by the 46 to 39 CNN instapoll
  4. Great question by one of the anchors: “did either guy help himself with the confrontational stuff?”
  5. The CNN & Fox focus groups did surprise me … CNN had undecideds in Ohio – they went 18 to 17 for Mitt … Fox had undecideds in Nevada … they went something like 24 to 4 for Mitt … logic: it’s all about the economy and Mitt won that issue.
  6. Obama neutralized the “does he want the job?” question and scored big on Libya … his team’s Libya debate strategy was well crafted and and well executed … especially when Crowley jumped in to help him … re: debate strategy”: “I’m responsible for everything that happens in my administration” – took responsibility without taking specific responsibility – that was a good play … “alQarda leadership has been decimated” – nice word-smithing – not “alQarda is on its heels” … made the Libya cover-up sound like word parsing … nicely done.
  7. My bet: the Crowley intervention will end up hurting Obama … it’s be the focus of discussion on the issue today, rather than his strong play on the issue.
  8. I agree with the focus groups that it’s all about he economy … Mitt’s riff re: “23 million looking for work, 47 million on food stamps, etc.” is damning … I thought Mitt made his economic plan sound credible (“listen, I’ve been putting together balanced budgets for decades … this guy hasn’t had a budget for 4 years”… net-net: Obama’s plan is simply tax the rich …
  9. In the CBS Instant Poll, 65% say Romney won on the issue of the economy. 34% say Obama won on the economy … that may be the story of the night.
  10. I also thought Mitt won big on energy … Obama just isn’t credible on the issue … comes across as literally tilting at windmills.
  11. Medicare-ObamaCare & Social Security are among the biggest issues … practically no discussion of them … nice job, Candy
  12.  I don’t get why such a big issue is being made of China … I can’t believe that men on the street understand the issue or care much about it.
  13. I though Mitt did a nice job re: “How are you different from Bush?” … wish Crowley had asked Obama “How are you different from Carter?”
  14. Obama’s shot re: Mitt’s taxes missed … as did Mitt’s shot at Obama for having mutual funds that invest in China …  one Nevada guy said: “whether Romney pays half as much or twice as much in taxes won’t impact my life” … that sums it up
  15. At the margins, I thought Mitt did the best he could re: immigration … the Univision line is strong “you didn’t keep your promise” … won’t move any big numbers, but may shift a point or two
  16. Obama got contraception on the table again … and, Crowley cut off Mitt’s response … so, issue will get some “war on women traction” … if this election hinges on whether law students get free condoms, we’re in big trouble.
  17. I’m curious re: why Mitt slipped in the marriage and family stuff … wasn’t accidental since it was forced in … must be something that tests well.
  18. The key number to watch is shift among the independents … both bases are revved up again.

Bottom line: no structural change in the race, Mitt’s momentum will slow some, but Mitt will still move up some in the polls.

>> Latest Posts

HOT: If capital gains tax rates go up 8.8%, how much will after-tax capital gains ROIs go down?

October 16, 2012

Here’s another HOT: Homa Online Tutorial …

Well, Obama says he’ll jack capital gains tax rates from 15% to 20% … and ObamaCare has a 3.8 non-payroll payroll tax on investment income starting in 2013.

So, if Obama is elected and he keeps his promise … the effective capital gains tax rate goes from 15% to 23.8% … a delta of 8.8%.

That 8.8% tax rate increase will cut after-tax capital gains ROIs.

By how much?

Answer: The pre-tax ROI times 8.8%.

In other words, the answer depends on the proportion of a stock’s value that is unrealized capital gains.

The answer isn’t intuitive and the math is a bit hairy, so let’s run thru an example ….

* * * * *
Scenario 1 – CG Tax = 15%

Assume that you bought a stock for $750 and sold it for $1,000 … netting a $250 pre-tax gain.

The pre-tax ROI is 33% … $250 divided by $750.

If the capital gains tax is 15%, you pay $37.50 in taxes … netting you, after taxes, $212.50.

The after-tax ROI is 28.3% … $212.50 divided by $750.

* * * *  *
Scenario 2 – CG Tax = 23.8%

Again assume that you bought a stock for $750 and sold it for $1,000 … netting a $250 pre-tax gain.

The pre-tax ROI is still 33% … $250 divided by $750.

If the capital gains tax is 23.8%, you pay $59.50 in taxes … netting you, after taxes, $190.50.

The after-tax ROI is 25.4% … $190.50 divided by $750.

* * * * *
The Difference

The CG-ROI @15% is 28.3%, where CG-ROI @ 15% is the Capital Gains ROI at a 15% Tax Rate.

The CG-ROI @23.8% is 25.4%, where CG-ROI @ 23.8% is the Capital Gains ROI at a 23.8% Tax Rate

The difference is 2.9% … that is, the CG-ROI dropped by 2.9 percentage points.

Note that 2.9% is equal to the pre-tax ROI (33%) times the difference in the tax rates (8.8%)

* * * * *
The generalizable answer

By math magic, the difference in after tax ROIs  are always equal to the pre-tax ROI (which varies depending on the relationship between a stock’s unrealized capital gains and its cost basis) times the difference in the tax rates (in this case, the 8.8% difference between  15% and 23.8%).

If you’re interested, click to view the math work …  if you’re not, skip to the table below.

Here’s a handy look-up table.

UR-CG are unrealized capital gains as a percentage of current stock market value.

In the above example, UR-CG equals 25% … $250 pre-tax capital gains divided by stock’s current market value $1,000 … and there’s a 2.9 percentage point drop in ROI.

As you’d expected, the greater the percentage of capital gains embedded in a stock, the greater the ROI hit if marginal tax rates go up.

image

* * * * *
So what?

I don’t give investment advice, but the numbers say that if you expect Obama to be re-elected … and if you expect him to keep his promise and jack up capital gains tax rates … and you have stocks with a high proportion of embedded capital gains … you should probably consider selling.

Technical tax note: Wash sales rules don’t apply to stocks sold at a gain … that is, you can sell them pay the capital gains taxes and immediately buy them back at a stepped-up basis (i.e. the current market price).

In a subsequent post I’ll work thru the math re: whether that makes sense.

>> Latest Posts

Limit the home mortgage interest deduction … outrageous!

October 16, 2012

Not really … and, it might come up in tonite’s debate.

First, keep in mind that 2/3’s of tax filers take the standard deduction rather than itemizing deductions … so they’d be unaffected.

And, keep in mind the roughly 1/3 of folks rent the place they live … they don’t get a direct mortgage interest deduction … though, economists argue, they get an indirect deduction since their landlords get to deduct mortgage interest as a business expense. So, the playing field would be leveled for home owners and renters.

So, what about limiting the deduction for those folks who currently own a home and  itemize deductions?

Well, for openers, the home mortgage interest deduction is already limited … there’s already a  $1 million cap on the size of a family’s mortgages that qualify for the deduction … the cap is $500,000 for individuals filing separately.

Interest paid on second homes can be included in the deduction, subject to the caps.

Note that the deduction isn’t a direct cap on the amount of interest that can be deducted … it’s a cap on the size of the mortgage(s) … so, a max’ed out family with a $1,000,000 mortgage @ 6% gets to deduct $60,000 … a family with a $1 MM loan at 4% gets to deduct $40,000.

With that as background …

Tightening the limits on the home interest mortgage deduction would be a fairly simple thing to do …

Specifically, what I’d do if I were Mitt:  Slide the limit down to, say $500,000 – which is about double the median home value in the country … disallow mortgage interest on second homes … and do not raise the cap with inflation… that way, the nominal value of the deduction would stick around forever, but “real” value of the deduction would slowly vanish over time … without jolting the real estate market.

Presto.

BTW: I’d get hammered by this change … but still, I think it would be a right thing to do.

P.S.  As I’ve said before, I’m also in favor of axing the deduction for state & local taxes … if states want to tax high and spend much, that’s their perogative … but, let residents of those states foot the bills … don’t lay off the cost to those of us living in fically responsible staes.  This change would fly politically for Romney since the high tax & spend states are blue ones that won’t vote for him any way … in most red states, Mitt’s proposed rate reductions would offset the loss of the deductions.

>> Latest Posts

Just in time for tonite’s debate … battery maker A123 files for bankruptcy.

October 16, 2012

Hot off the wires from Bloomberg

A123 Systems —  the electric car battery maker that received a $249 million federal grant —  filed for bankruptcy protection after failing to make a debt payment that was due yesterday.

There is “no assurance” that A123 will be able to find a way to continue to operate its business as a going concern, the company said.

image

For those keeping score,  Solyndra left taxpayers holding a  $535 million loan guarantee granted by the U.S. Energy Department.

Biden: “The AMA supported what we did (on healthcare). AARP endorsed what we did, too” … here’s why, Joe.

October 14, 2012

More from the debate …

This one always makes me scream.

Biden said: “The AMA supported what we did. AARP endorsed what we did, too”

That’s factually correct, but very misleading.

* * * * *

AARP

As we wrote last week, the AARP told Team Obama to stop using their name in the campaign.

Why?

Probably because they feel a bit vulnerable when folks learn that their support had little to do with what’s best for seniors … AARP received a windfall pay-off.

Except for an election year transitional provision, ObamaCare fundamentally eliminates the popular Medicare Advantage program … and, the elimination of Medicare Advantage is a windfall for the AARP insurance business:

Thanks to its cuts to Medicare Advantage, ObamaCare is expected to expand the number of seniors buying “medigap” supplemental insurance plans,”

AARP controls 34 percent of the market for such plans.

According to a 2011 House Ways and Means Committee report, AARP stands to make between $55 million and $166 million from ObamaCare in 2014 alone
Source: Washington Examiner

* * * * *
AMA

Similarly, we previously wrote that the AMA endorsed ObamaCare for self-serving financial reasons.

Yes, the AMA supported ObamaCare, but … according to Forbes, less than 15% of practicing docs belong to the AMA … and “90% of the AMA’s funding comes via a government sanctioned monopoly whereby the AMA sells the billing codes upon which the entire health care system relies”

A provision of ObamaCare explicitly provides for the AMA’s coding monopoly and perpetual government funded  income stream.

How do doctors really feel?

According to Forbes

This past February, 60 percent of more than 5,000 doctors surveyed said the Obama health law would have a negative impact on patients  …. more than half thought it would have a negative impact on their relationships with patients  …43 percent said the health care reform itself would likely lead them to retire over the next 5 years, and only 37 percent said that was an unlikely consequence of this law.

* * * * *

If Obama uses the line again on Tuesday, I hope Mitt pounces.

>> Latest Posts

Biden: “Some of the 47% pay higher effective rates than Gov. Romney” … say, what?

October 13, 2012

I’ve been re-watching the Biden-Ryan debate and reading the transcript … this time, it’s for comedy value.

image

Beyond the whoppers, I can’t believe how many fundamentally dumb things Biden said.  Many got obscured by his bluster.

Here’s one of my favorites … suitable for the Yogi Berra quote book:

These people [the 47%]  are my mom and dad, the people I grew up with, my neighbors.

They pay more effective tax than Governor Romney pays in his federal income tax.

I’ve had it up to here with this notion that 47 percent …

Full transcript & video

An obvious non sequitur.

By definition, the folks in the 47% don’t pay any Federal income taxes, so their effective rates are zero

And, zero is less than 14% … or any other positive tax rate.

Geez.

And that dufass is in line to be President.

>> Latest Posts

Biden: “Syria is 5 times larger than Libya” … say, what?

October 12, 2012

During the Vice Presidential debate on Thursday night, Joe Biden claimed, incorrectly, that that Team Obama is turning a blind eye towards Syria because – compared to Libya —  it  “is a different country, it is five times as large geographically, it has one fifth the population”.

Ordinarily, we’d give him a pass (yeah, right), but Biden claims to be Mr. International and was trying to discredit Ryan’s foreign policy knowledge.

Turns out –- according to Google –that Syria is about 1/10th the size of Libya with over 3 times the population.

Oops.

image

image

Thanks to AG-C for feeding the lead.

>> Latest Posts