Lending more credibility to Keystone Phil's anecdotes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Is that enough to make up over 140k votes? (and most likely more, since Obama seems to be gaining elsewhere.)

If you can prove to me that Obama is getting 140,000 votes (or more) elsewhere, I'll concede that the results here won't make a difference.

The point of that statement was that Obama can't be losing 140k votes in that area alone. Hell the entire population of NE Philly is only 300k-450k depending on definition.

[Keystone Phil]

Is that enough to make up over 140k votes? (and most likely more, since Obama seems to be gaining elsewhere.)

If you can prove to me that Obama is getting 140,000 votes (or more) elsewhere, I'll concede that the results here won't make a difference.

The point of that statement was that Obama can't be losing 140k votes in that area alone. Hell the entire population of NE Philly is only 300k-450k depending on definition.

...

What brings up the random 140,000 votes?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Is that enough to make up over 140k votes? (and most likely more, since Obama seems to be gaining elsewhere.)

If you can prove to me that Obama is getting 140,000 votes (or more) elsewhere, I'll concede that the results here won't make a difference.

The point of that statement was that Obama can't be losing 140k votes in that area alone. Hell the entire population of NE Philly is only 300k-450k depending on definition.

...

What brings up the random 140,000 votes?

Kerry's margin of victory.

[Keystone Phil]

Is that enough to make up over 140k votes? (and most likely more, since Obama seems to be gaining elsewhere.)

If you can prove to me that Obama is getting 140,000 votes (or more) elsewhere, I'll concede that the results here won't make a difference.

The point of that statement was that Obama can't be losing 140k votes in that area alone. Hell the entire population of NE Philly is only 300k-450k depending on definition.

...

What brings up the random 140,000 votes?

Kerry's margin of victory.

McCain is going to cut into that margin elsewhere, my friend.

[Politico]

Let's face it: Santorum lost by the largest margin of any incumbent Senator since, what, 1980? It was nearly twenty points! Let's hear Keystone Phil's anecdotes about THAT race.

I will not be surprised if McCain ends up losing PA by 15-20 points.

[Keystone Phil]

Let's hear Keystone Phil's anecdotes about THAT race.

Still can't argue anything concerning this race?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^ Goldmine candidate

[Politico]

Let's hear Keystone Phil's anecdotes about THAT race.

Still can't argue anything concerning this race?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^ Goldmine candidate

The past is prologue. Let's hear the 2006 Santorum/Casey anecdotes again...

Phil, everybody respects your support for John McCain. But McCain is not going to carry your home state of Pennsylvania, bud. Let it go...

[tokar]

Its not going to happen Phil...

First off, the article quotes the fact that only 53% turned out from Philadelphia for the primary.  53% apparently equals to 442k+ (according to the number of votes shown on USEA primasry results).
I doubt that Philadelphia will have a 53% showing in november.  Just look at the past 5 elections:
2006 (Senate) - 424k+
2004 - 674k+
2004 (Senate) - 641k+
2000 - 561k+
2000 (Senate) - 526k+
I would show races prior to 2000 but USEA apparently does not have county numbers for these elections.

So already they dont have to worry about eclipsing 53%.  Yes, 2006 had 424k+, but it was not a presidential year, and there is no way you can tell me they cant get 18k more people to vote to eclipse the primary total.
I know its a rough estimate because population numbers need to be updated with the 2010 census, but if 442k = 53%, then 641k equates to about 77%.  So I think they will be fine.  Rendell said they need 75% turnout, and if 2004 got above that, then they shouldnt have a problem getting that for 2008.

Secondly, we shouldn't just focus on Philadelphia alone.  We should look at the other 4 Philadelphia area counties, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware, and Bucks.  These should give very good indication of what Obama should expect:

::::PA 2000 vs PA 2004 (+ = Bush gain, - = Bush loss.  Bold = Bush victory)::::
PA margin victory difference: +1.67 (4.17-2.50)

Bucks county difference: +1.37 (4.17-2.80)
Philadelphia county difference: +0.91 (62.05-61.14)
Montgomery county difference: -1.86 (9.73-11.59)
Delaware county difference: -3.13 (11.70-14.83)
Chester county difference: -5.14 (9.61-4.47)

Philadelphia Metro victory difference: -0.88% (25.27-26.16)

::::PA 2000 vs PA 20004 vote totals::::
Chester: +23.0%
Philadelphia: +20.1%
Montgomery: +20.2%
Delaware: +14.7%
Bucks: +21.4%

Metro area total: +19.8%

Metro area % of population: +0.66%


Yes, the margin of victory in Phila. was smaller, but by under 1%.  That is not enough to overcome the losses from the surrounding counties, namely Chester, where 2004 saw the democrats pick up a whopping 5.14%.  Overall, they picked up a total of 0.88%, which is quite significant given that the metro area accounts for a third of the state's population, and probably even more of the registered voter population (i remember some article on Philly.com quoting 40%, but I have yet to figure out how they get 40% because pure Census numbers shows it at 31.3%, vote totals from 2000 show a little under 33%, 2004 shows a little over 33%, 2006 shows it at 32.6% and the 2008 primary shows it to be around 37.5%).  Allegheny and Lehigh saw similar gains for the democrats...(yes a bunch of other counties saw republican gains, but I'm pointing out big counties, and the Philadelphia metro counties and Allegheny account for 5 of the top 6.  Lancaster rounds out the top 6 coming in at #5, and even that county saw gains, albeit marginal, for the democrats going from R+35 in 2000 to R+32 in 2004.  Vote count jumped by ~50k.


Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  This doesn't bode well for the republicans given that the area (which encompasses Erie) is represented by a republican and went democratic in 2004 and 2000.


I can't think too much about PA numbers right now.  I have to keep my mind on Physics right now...stupid hw.

In short, there is too much information which shows that the battle McCain is fighting, particularly in the 2nd most democratic city in the United States (Philadelphia), is a very steep uphill one.

[Keystone Phil]

Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  

Uh, no. That was...what...one poll and wasn't it an internal?

[tokar]

Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  

Uh, no. That was...what...one poll and wasn't it an internal?

No, right-leaning SurveyUSA.  http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3246

[Keystone Phil]

Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  

Uh, no. That was...what...one poll and wasn't it an internal?

No, right-leaning SurveyUSA.  http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3246

Right leaning? LOL

Ok but whatever the case, that's one poll with a history of inaccuracy.

[tokar]

Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  

Uh, no. That was...what...one poll and wasn't it an internal?

No, right-leaning SurveyUSA.  http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3246

Right leaning? LOL

Ok but whatever the case, that's one poll with a history of inaccuracy.

What is so funny?  SurveyUSA is known to be right-leaning.

[tokar]

Thirdly, polls out of the 3rd district show Kathy Dahlkemper (D) with a lead.  

Uh, no. That was...what...one poll and wasn't it an internal?

No, right-leaning SurveyUSA.  http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3246

Right leaning? LOL

Ok but whatever the case, that's one poll with a history of inaccuracy.

Oh and by the way, SurveyUSA ranks as one of the top (#2) polling agencies according to FiveThirtyEight: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/label/pollster%20ratings

[Lunar]

538 bases those rankings off of the primaries, where "right and left-leaning" is meaningless.

SUSA is also ridiculous.  In 2006 they consistently had a 5-6% pro-Dem bias.

[tokar]

538 bases those rankings off of the primaries, where "right and left-leaning" is meaningless.

SUSA is also ridiculous.  In 2006 they consistently had a 5-6% pro-Dem bias.

And those rankings are therefore nullified?

They are all we have to go by until the 2008 election is over and Nate decides to update those rankings.

I would bet that Nate figures in those ratings into his daily calculations... (see the weights of the polls).

[Lunar]

538 bases those rankings off of the primaries, where "right and left-leaning" is meaningless.

SUSA is also ridiculous.  In 2006 they consistently had a 5-6% pro-Dem bias.

And those rankings are therefore nullified?

They are all we have to go by until the 2008 election is over and Nate decides to update those rankings.

I would bet that Nate figures in those ratings into his daily calculations... (see the weights of the polls).

Say whatever you want.  SUSA is the most erratic credible pollster, showing jumps of dozens of percents in its results over mere weeks.  It's not right-leaning and in in past elections has had a Democratic bias and is often more Democratic than other firms thus far in 2008, although not always.

Nate's model is overhyped.  His brilliance in his projections in the primaries used *NO* polling data...

[tokar]

538 bases those rankings off of the primaries, where "right and left-leaning" is meaningless.

SUSA is also ridiculous.  In 2006 they consistently had a 5-6% pro-Dem bias.

And those rankings are therefore nullified?

They are all we have to go by until the 2008 election is over and Nate decides to update those rankings.

I would bet that Nate figures in those ratings into his daily calculations... (see the weights of the polls).

Say whatever you want.  SUSA is the most erratic credible pollster, showing jumps of dozens of percents in its results over mere weeks.  It's not right-leaning and in in past elections has had a Democratic bias and is often more Democratic than other firms thus far in 2008, although not always.

Nate's model is overhyped.  His brilliance in his projections in the primaries used *NO* polling data...

I actually did not visit his site during the primaries.  I only heard of it after NC went +15 and Nate's site was the only one to predict as much.

None of the sites out there provide full disclosure as to how they get to their predictions (everyone says a calculation, but no one shows how they get there).  So 538 in that respect is no different from the other sites, but what I do like about 538 is the nice organized layout and weighted polling.  Compare this to sites like USEA which is pretty much a 3 poll average...which get knocked out of whack from a ridiculous outlier (see West Virginia).  Nate's site actually took into account that this is somewhat of a ridiculous outlier and still shows West Virigina as a LEAN GOP, where as USEA shows TOSSUP.


It would be one thing if Nate was predicting something completely out of the water, but Nate's predictions are pretty much in line with all the other independent sites (see: http://3bluedudes.com/ProjectDatabase.htm ).


On a side note, why are you so defensive?  You are a democrat from California with a political matrix similar to mine, no?

[Lunar]

I agreed with most of your post, just not the idea that SUSA is right-leaning.    Just because I'm a (D) doesn't mean that I have to think that the world is skewed against me!

538 is a great site and the only of its kind, it is just flawed in some notable ways (relying on the 2008 primaries for pollster ratings and for undecided breakouts are the two biggest) and tends to overanalyze and extrapolate minor things....

  This site's map is far more flawed, but it doesn't try and predict anything.

[tokar]

I agreed with most of your post, just not the idea that SUSA is right-leaning.    Just because I'm a (D) doesn't mean that I have to think that the world is skewed against me!

538 is a great site and the only of its kind, it is just flawed in some notable ways (relying on the 2008 primaries for pollster ratings and for undecided breakouts are the two biggest) and tends to overanalyze and extrapolate minor things....

  This site's map is far more flawed, but it doesn't try and predict anything.

whos map do u trust?

[Lunar]

538's is the best out there.

I don't know of any other predictive maps that use models though.

Pollster.com has the best snapshot capabilities.

[Keystone Phil]

I'll just use this thread for random anecdotal evidence...

I visited my Grandparents tonight. My Grandmother was telling me about a certain someone she is friendly with who stopped to talk to her at a local diner. All I'll say about this certain someone is that he or she is a major Democratic ward leader here in the NE Philly and this person also holds elected office.

The person asked my Grandmother, "So be honest. Who do you want?" My Grandmother told her that she's for McCain. The Democratic ward leader responded, "I wish there were more people like you."

[Sbane]

I'll just use this thread for random anecdotal evidence...

I visited my Grandparents tonight. My Grandmother was telling me about a certain someone she is friendly with who stopped to talk to her at a local diner. All I'll say about this certain someone is that he or she is a major Democratic ward leader here in the NE Philly and this person also holds elected office.

The person asked my Grandmother, "So be honest. Who do you want?" My Grandmother told her that she's for McCain. The Democratic ward leader responded, "I wish there were more people like you."

Wow democrats in philly are really messed up. That ward leader ought to quit if he feels that way.

[ChrisFromNJ]

I'll just use this thread for random anecdotal evidence...

I visited my Grandparents tonight. My Grandmother was telling me about a certain someone she is friendly with who stopped to talk to her at a local diner. All I'll say about this certain someone is that he or she is a major Democratic ward leader here in the NE Philly and this person also holds elected office.

The person asked my Grandmother, "So be honest. Who do you want?" My Grandmother told her that she's for McCain. The Democratic ward leader responded, "I wish there were more people like you."

It's official! Give the state to McCain.

[Keystone Phil]

I'll just use this thread for random anecdotal evidence...

I visited my Grandparents tonight. My Grandmother was telling me about a certain someone she is friendly with who stopped to talk to her at a local diner. All I'll say about this certain someone is that he or she is a major Democratic ward leader here in the NE Philly and this person also holds elected office.

The person asked my Grandmother, "So be honest. Who do you want?" My Grandmother told her that she's for McCain. The Democratic ward leader responded, "I wish there were more people like you."

It's official! Give the state to McCain.

It's past midnight! If Mommy and Daddy catch you up this late, no snacks tomorrow night!

[LanceMcSteel]

Anectodal evidence=fail